Skip to main content

Full text of "A second true defence of the meer nonconformists, against the untrue accusations, reasonings and history of Dr. Edward Stillingfleet .."

See other formats 


V~      -tro 


v2£W* 


B 


*\ 


,t  ft. »«%«„,  j^ 


PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


Collection  of  Puritan  Literature. 


% 


Division 

Section 

Number 


gcB 


1 

J    A    SECON  D  TRUE 

DEFEN6E 

OF    THE    MEER. 

Nonconformifts, 

AGAINST    THE 

Untrue  ACCUSATIONS,   REASONINGS  and 

HISTORY  of  Dr.  EDWARD  STILLING. 

FLEET,   DEAN  of  St.  PAVLS,    &c. 

Clearly  proving  that  it  is  (  not  fin  but )  duty 

Iri.  Not  wilfully  to  commit  the  many  fins  of  Conformity. 
2.  Not  Sacrilegioufly  to  forfake  the  Preaching  of  the 
Gofpel. 
I  3.  Not  to  cea(e  publick  worfliipping  of  God. 
I  4.  To  ufe  needful  Paftoral  helps  for  falvation,  though 
\     men  forbid  it,  and  call  it  Schifm. 

Written  by  RICHARD  BAXTER,  not  to  accufe  others,  but  to 
defend  Gods  Truth,  and  the  true  way  of  Peace  after  near  20 
years  loud  Accufaticns  of  the  filencing,  profecutirjg  Clergy 
and  their  Sons. 

With  fome  Notes  on  Mr.  Jojeph  Glanviles  Zealous  and  Im- 
partial Proteftant,  and  Dr.  L.  Moulws  Chara&er. 

I  Tim  6.  5,  6.  Perverfe  difputings  of  men  of  corrupt  minds,  and  deft  it  ate 
of  the  truth  ',  fuppofing  that  gain  is godltnefs  :  from  fuch  withdraw  thy 
felf.  Butgodlinefs  with  contentment  is  great  gain. 

LONDON;  Printed  for  Nevil  Simons,  at  the  Sign  of  the  Three  Golden 
^ocks  at  the  Weft-end  of  Sc.  Pauls.      168 1 . 


Church,  but  fuch  of  them  as  Were  capable,  by  continued  own- 
ing their  Baptifmal  Covenant,  not  nullified  by  proved  Herefie, 
or  inconfiftent  wickednefs.  And  they  held,  that  no  unwilling 
perfon  was  capable  of  a  fealed  Pardon  of  fin,  .and  (oof  Church- 
Communion,  nor  yet  of  the  true  receiving  of  the  ufe  of  the 
Paftoral  office :  And  therefore  that  none  but  free  Confeuters  (hould 
have  the  Sacrarrent,  nor  be  related  to  the  Paftor,  as  his  Flock  of 
that  Church :  but  the  reft  (hould  be  conftrained  to  live  as  Cate- 
chumens, or  Hearers,  as  they  were  capable,  in  peace  and  quiet- 
nefs  (and  fuch  as  the  Magiftrate  found  meet  to  be.tolerated  in 
other  Churches,  who  only  were  uncapable  in  that). 

2.  They  were  fo  far  for  Presbytery,  as  to  hold,  that  i.  If 
men  of  competent  fufficiency,  were  made  by  ordination  Elders, 
ejufdemordhis  with  the  chief  Paftor,  to  be  his  AffcffQrs  and  Affi? 
ftants,  though  they  (eldom,  or  never  Preached  publickly,  but 
helped  him  in  Catechizing,  or  private  over-fight,,  and  in  judging 
perfoqs  and  cafes  5  and  though  in  neceffity  they  laboured  with 
their  hands,  it  would  not  be  unlike  the  ancient  Government, 
q,,  And  they  judged,  that  all  Gods  work  (hould  be  done  in  the 
greateft  concord,  and  with  the  beft  mutual  couniel  and  help  that 
might  be  5  and  therefore  that  Synods  are  to, that  end  of  great 
u(e:  and  if  they  were  appointed  at  dated  times  and  places,  it 
would  by  order, ;be  a  furtherance  to^their  ends:  But  they  were 
not  for  their  aflfuming  a  proper  Regent  Power,  by  Majority  of 
Votes  over  the  minor  part,  or  the  abfent  Paftors,  and  thought 
that  when  fixednefs  occafioned  that  ufurpation,occafional  Synods 
fro  re  »atay  were  better.  And  3.  They  judged,  that  Presbyters 
are  ejufdew  ordhm  with  Bifhops,  and  that  no  Bifhops  have  a  di- 
vine right  to  govern  without  the  Presbyters  affiftance,.nor  to 
deprivethemof  any  of  their  power,  nor  their  Churches  of  true 
Difcipline  or  Wor(hip,  nor,  the  people  of  their  Rights  3  much 
lefs  to  ufe  any  forcing  power  of  the  (Word  on  any. 

3.  They  were  fo  far  for  Epifcopacy,  as  to  hold  it  lawful, -and 
Convenient,  tliat  the  particular  Churches  have  one  that  (hall  have 
a  Priority,,  and' in  many  thing?  a  Negative  Vote,,  as  the  Incum- 
bent 


bent  in  each  Parifh  hath  among  his  Curates  a  fort  of  power. 
And  that  the  Presbyteries  and  Synods  have  their  Moderators* 
and  if  they  were  fixed  durante  vita,  and  bad  a  Negative  Vote  in 
Ordinations,  they  could  confent  }  fobeit  they  were  duly  chofen 
as  of  old,  and  had  no  forcing  power  by  the  fword,  but  only  a 
Minifterial,  teaching,  guiding  power.  And  fomeof  them  thought 
it  of  Divine  right,  that  the  Apoftles  and  Evangelifts  have  Suc- 
ceflbrs  in  the  ordinary  parts  of  their  office  5  and  that  to  have  a. 
fpecial  care  of  many  Churches,  and  their  Bifhops  and  Elders  are 
fome  of  that  ordinary  part. 

4.  And  tothe  Eraftians  z\(b  they  granted,  that  the  King  tsthe 
Sopreii  e  Governour  of  the  Church,  by  rhe  fword,  or  force* 
and  that  we  muft  obey  him,  not  only  when  he  enforceth  the 
Commar  is  of  Chrift,  but  in  all  a&s  of  outward  circumftance 
and  order,  left  by  God  to  his  determination,  and  not  appropri- 
ated to  the  Minifters  office.  Thefe  were  the  thoughts  then  of 
the  far  greateft  part  of  the  Minifters  that  I  had  then  knowIedgoE 

$.  2.  Before  the  King  returned,  many  Epifcopal  Doftors  and 
great  men,  perfwaded  thefe  Reconcilers,  that  thus  much  would 
be  accepted  to  our  common  concord,  if  the  King  werereftored : 
But  fome  faid,  They  do  but  dedeve  you,  there  are  fuch  men 
now  got  into  chief  credit  on  that  fide,  that  will  filence  yoi>  all, 
and  ruine  you,  unlefs  you  will  follow  Grotius,  or  be  of  the 
French  Religion,  or  unite  in  the  Pope,  as  Prwapium  nmtaiis, 
and  obey  him,  z&xhzWejkrn  Patriarch,  8c :.  And  when  you  arc 
all  turned  out,  what  men  havethey  to  fupply  your  places? 

p.  3.  But  when  the.  King  came  in,  and  encouraged  the  R-e- 
concilers  with  the  promife  of  his  help,  they  made  the  attempt 
in  1660,  and  1-6-6 1.  the  Hiftory  of  which  I  need  not  repeat, 
Since  that  forefeeing  what  the  iilencing  of  fo  many  Minifters, 
and  the  afflifting  of  the  people  of  our  mind  would  unavoidably 
oaufe,  we  pleaded,  we  petitioned  the  Bilhops  to  have  prevented 
it,  by  thofe  neceffary  mean*  which  they  might  have  yielded 

to. 


to,  to  their  own  a  dvantage:  But  it  was  all  in  vain. 

$.  4.  When  the  Ad  of  Uniformity  came  out,  of  about  9000 
Minifters  that  kept  in,  and  had  laid  by  the  Liturgy  before,  a- 
bout  7000  Conformed  (  to  the  altered  Liturgy,  before  any  of 
them  ever  favv  it,  fave  a  few)  by  declaring  their  Affent  and  Con- 
fent  (the  A&  being  known  before  the  Book  could  be  Printed:) 
and  about  2000  were  filenced  by  that  Aft.  How  they  behaved 
themfelves  fince  then,  is  fo  well  known,  and  I  have  here,  and 
oft  declared  5  and  how  the  Plague  firft,  and  the  burning  of  the 
Churches  next,  and  the  Kings  Licenfes  next,  did  give  them  the 
opportunities  and  calls  which  made  more  publick  Preaching  feem 
to  them  a  duty,  that  Khali  not  make  recital  of  it. 

$.  5.  AH  this  while  abundance  of  inveftiues  were  poured  out 
againft  them,  by  many  of  the  Conforming  Clergy,  in  Prefs  and 
Pulpits  $  and  especially  in  the  ears  of  great  men,  to  whom  we 
had  no  accefs,  but  feemed  what  fuch  men  delcribed  us  to  be. 
The  new  Laws  againft  Conventicles,  and  the  Oxford  AQ  of  Con- 
finement had  been  added  to  the  firft:  Many  were  hunted  up  and 
down,  their  Goods  and  Libraries  diftrained  -0  many  were  impri- 
fbned  -0  fome  there  died :  The  Informers  and  Profecutors  grew 
weary :  They  faw  the  feverity  came  moft  from  the  Prelates,  and 
the  Parliament,  the  King  being  not  for  feverity  therein :  The 
Juftices  grew  unwilling  of  Execution  5  the  Preachers  reprove 
them,  and  call  on  them  to  put  the  Law's  in  Execution  5  they  are 
greatly  offended  at  the  Kings  Licenfes }  they  continue  to  accufe 
us  for  Schifm  at  leaft,  and  fome  of  Sedition  $  though  we  invaded 
none  of  their  Temples ,  nor  askt  them  for  any  part  of  their 
maintenance.  And  the  Parliament  and  Prelates  were  fofharp  a- 
gainft  us,  that  we  durft  not  tell  the  world  what  we  refufed  iriC  0*/- 
formity,  and  why,  left  we  put  them  upon  more  feverity  3  nor  in- 
deed could  we  do  it,  the  Prefs  was  lockt  up  by  fb  great  penalties. 
But  while  we  were  forced  to  filence,  we  were  lowdly  called  to, 
to  fay  what  we  fiuck^at,  and  what  it  was  that  we  would  haze.  And 

after 


after  17  years  fuch  calls,  I  ventured  to  name  the  things 5  and 
hence  is  theftorm  of  the  prefent  indignation. 

$.  6.  I  had  before  proved  the  wilful  defer t ion  of  our  Mini- 
ftry,  efpecially  when  the  King  Licenfed  us,  to  be  odious  Sacri- 
ledg:  To  this  lam  told,  of  mens  power  to  filence  fuch  as  they 
think  deferve  it :  I  grant  it,  if  they  truly  think  fo:  fomaythey 
on  juftcaufe  alienate  Churches,  and  Church-lands,  and  hang  Ma* 
lefa&ors :  but  not  when  no  fuch  caufe  is  given,  nor  at  their 
pleafure. 

$.  7.  When  in  the  fitft  Plea  for  Peace  I  had  ftated  the  cafe  of 
our  Nonconformity,  I  intended  to  bring  the  Proofs  of  each  par- 
ticular fuppofed  finful,  as  I  after  found  occafion.  And  meeting 
with  abundance  that  accufed  us  of  dilloyal,  rebellious  Princi- 
ples, I  largly  delivered  my  own,  and  many  others  judgment  of 
Civil  and  Eccefiaftical  Authority,  the  power  of  Princes ,  and 
the  duty  of  Subjefts  5  and  therein  alfo  wrote  fome  Anfwer  to 
Four  Accufetions  brought  againft  us.  1 .  That  we  pretend  Grace 
againft  Morality.  2.  That  we  hold,  that  things  Indifferent  be- 
came unlawful,  if  commanded.  3.  I  largly  confuted  Bifhop 
Morleys  falfe  Accufetion  of  my  Dodtrine,  of  the  Magiftrates 
power  to  command  things  unlawfully  accident  5  and  Dr.  Parkers 
Do&rine  of  Scandal.  4.  1  confuted  them  that  extend  our  Non- 
conformity to  things  which  we  refufe  not.  All  this  in  the  Je- 
cond  Plea  for  Peaces  which  none  yet,  that  I  know  of,  havean- 
fwered. 

$.  8.  And  left  any  (hould  think  that  we  are  all  for  Negatives, 
I  wrote  a  Treatife  of  the  only  Terms  of  TJmverfal  Chriflian  con- 
tord,  which  I  value  above  all  the  reft,  being  affured  that  the 
Churches  will  never  otherwife  be  healed,  than  by  that  impartial, 
fure,  and  eafie  Catholick  way,  which  fome  have  reviled,  but 
none  fince,  that  I  know  of,  confuted.  One  Learned  Biftiop 
(that  had  a  chief  hand  in  our  prefent  Impofittons  and  eje&ion} 

I  c 


Idefired  to  tell  me,  which  is  the  way  of  Christian  concord,  if 
this  be  not :  And  he  maintaineth,  That  the  only,  way  is  to  obey  the 
Colledg  of  Pajiors,  who  are  to  govern  the  Catholick^  Church  through 
all  the  world,  per  Lit  eras  format  as.  Where  this  Colledg,  as  one 
governing  power  do  meet,  or  how  they  fignifie  their  Majority 
of  Votes,  and  in  what  cafes,  and  who  mud  gather  the  Votes 
(from  Abajjia  to  Mofcovie),  and  An  how  long  time,  and  how 
they  (hall  come  to  all  men  with  certainty }  and  whether  the  eje- 
cted, filenced,  and  excommunicated,  &c.  may  appeal  to  them, 
,&c.  I  could  not  learn. 

§.  9.  In  the  fame  Book  I  fufficientiy  confuted  Mr.  H  Dodwelh 
great  Book,  Xvhich  denyeth  not  only  the  Churches  and  Mini- 
ftry,  which  are  not  by  uninterrupted  Epifcopal  Ordination,  but 
alfo  the  ordinary  falvation  of  all  fiich  Churches,  as  having  no 
covenant  promife,  by  valid  Sacraments  delivered  them.  He  hath 
pretended  fome  defence  in  a  late  Book  of  Letters:  to  which,  if 
they  can  be  Printed,  I  hope  to  give  eafily  a  fatisfa&ory  reply. 

$.  10.  "hi  theiamebook  hePublifheth  fome  old  Letters  of  his 
ito  me,  for  the  Dioceian  frame  of  Government^  the  notice  of 
which  beforehand 'given  me,  caufedme to Publifh  a  full Treatife of 
.Diocefan  Epifcopacy ,  containing  the  Reafons  why  we  cannot 
fwear  to  it,  or  approve  it,  or  fwear  never  to  endeavour  any  re- 
forming alteration  of  the  frame  here  fetled,  and  exercifed.  And 
whatever  Mr.  Dodwell  pretendeth  to  the  contrary,  if  this  Trea- 
tife do  not  fully  anfwer  his  Letter,  and  juftifie  us  in  this  part  of 
Nonconformity,  I  am  unable  to  judg  of  the  Caufe,  but  am 
willing  to  recieve  any  better  information. 

$.  11.  And  becaufe  I  find  fal(e  Hiftory,  not  the  leaft  caufe  of 
ordinary  miftakes,  and  men  cry  up  Diocefan  Prelacy,  as  the  an- 
cient, and  chief  cure  of  Schifm  *  I  gathered  an  Abftraft  of  the 
hiftory  of  Bilhops,  and  their  Councils,  that  the  true  matter 
of  fait  might  not  be  fo  commonly  miftaken  as  it  is. 

$.12.  At 


$.  1 3.  At  the  fame  time  came  out  againft  me,  Firft,  a  book  of 
Mi\  John  Cheyneys,  the  miftakes  of  which  I  mantfeftcd  in  .iii'-Ati- 
fvver:  And  afteiward  old  Letters  of  Mr.  liink^eys,  to  which  I 
had  an  old  Anfwer,  which  I  eaft  by,  and  now  Publifhed  :  and 
another  Accufer,  abounding  with  untruths,  called  the  Impleder^ 
and  another  called  Reflections,  or  Speculum,  &c.  And  another 
Book  of  Mr.  Cheneys,  full  of  moll  pitiful  miftake^  All  which, 
with  Juftice  Roger  L'Eftrange's  Dialogue,  and  fomeothers,  lan- 
fwered  together  in  a  Book  called  the  Third  Defence  ef  the  Non- 
con  fur  mijls,  &c. 

§.  13.  Bat  the  Accufations  of  Dean  Stillingfleet  in  his  Sermon, 
made  the  loudeft  noife :  In  the  Anfwer  to  which,  I  chiefly  defired 
to  have  come  tofome  underftanding  agreement  with  him,  about 
the  true  ftate  of  our  Cafe  and  Controverfie^  and  to  that  end, 
craved  his  anfwer  to  feveral  neceffary  queftions}  but  was  not 
able  to  procure  it.  And  now  in  his  large  Book,  where  I  hoped 
to  have  found  an  Anfwer  to  them,  I  look  for  it  in  vain.  Yea, 
though  Mr.  Hik^ringhiU  roughly  provoked  him  but  to  expound 
his  own  Text,  and  tell  us  intelligibly,  what  the  fame  Rule  is, 
which  the  Apoftle  would  have  all  walk  by,  he  will  not  do  it  3 
but  inftead  of  that,  withunufual  gentlenefs  tells  me,  he  w\\l  not 
differ  about  it,  if  I  do  but  grant,  that  it  is  a  Rule  that  binds  us 
all  to  do  all  that  lawfully  we  can  for  peace,  which  I  cheerfully  grant  5 
And  if  it  be  not  lawful  for  peace  and  concord  to  forbear  filen- 
cing  us,  imprifoning  us,  accufing  us  as  odious  for  not  wilful  fin- 
ning, and  urging  Magiftrates  to  execute  the  Laws  againft  up, 
and  making  us  feem  Schifmaticks  for  not  forbearing  to  Preach 
theCofpel,  to  which  we  were  vowed  and  coniecrated  by  Ordi- 
nation 5  I  know  not  lawful  from  unlawful :  I  cannot  yet  get  him 
to  tell  us,  what  he  would  have  the  many  fcore  thousands  do  on 
the  Lords  Days,  that  have  no  room  in  the  Parilh-Churches  }  with 
many  fuch,  which  our  cafe  is  concerned  in. 

$.14.1  thought  his  Book  had  been  an  Anfwer  to  mine,and  other 
mens  Prefaces }  but  I  find  that  I  was  miftakeri :  Indeed  he  nameth 
five  Books  written  againft  his  Accufation:  what  he  faith  to  Dr. 
Owen,  and  Mr.  Alfop,  I  leave  to  themfelves  to  confider  of:  The 

B  Countrey 


Countrey  Gentlemans  Cafe,  in  fenfe,  was  this,  Whether  all  they 
that  thinly  Parifh-Communion,  under  the  prefer? t  imp options,  tob* 
fin,  are  bound,  till  they  can  change  their  judgment  ^  to  forbear  all 
Church-worfhip ,  and  live  likg  Atheifls,  and  jo  be  damned  ?  And 
who  can  find  any  Anfwer  to  this  ? 

Mr.  Barret's  Queries  out  of  his  Books,he  faith,next  nothing  to, 
but  a  dark  retra&ing  his  Irenicon :  And  far  be  it  from  me  to  blame 
him  for  growing  wifer.But  why  took  he  no  notice  of  hisown  words, 
cited  in  the  Epiftle,  out  of  his  late  Book  againft  Idolatry,  threate- 
ning us  all  with  no  lefs  than  damnation,  if  we  prefer  not  the  purefls 
Church. 

And  as  to  my  Defence,  his  Book  is  nothing  like  an  Anfwer, 
unlefi  his  naming  me,  and  citing  out  of  that,  and  other  Books, 
a  few  broken  (craps,  which  he  thought  he  could  make  (bme  ad- 
vantage of,  may  be  called  an  Anfwer. 

$.  15.  Iconfefs  he  hath  made  fbme  attempt  to  tell  me  what  the 

National  Church  of  England  is  5  but  fb  Independently,  as  I  doubt 

his  party  will  difown  it  with  great  offence.  In  fhort,  he  holds, 

that  there  is  no  fuch  thing  as  a  Church  of  England,  in  theufual 

Political  fenfe,  having  any  Conftitutive,  Ecclefiaftical,  Supreme 

Power,  Monarchical,  or  Ariftocratical,  or  Democratical,  but  it's 

only  the  many  Churches  in£#g/tf#^,affociated  by  the  common  con- 

lent  inParliament,&c.  Remember  that  be  and  I  arefo  far  agreed; 

As  I  was  writing  this,!  faw  a  Book  againft  him  of  a  friend,too 

much  forme,  andfomewhat  freely  handling  the  Dr.  which  in  this 

point  would  help  them3byfaying,thattheG?ffzwtff/0/z  having  the 

LegiJIafive  Church- Power,  may  be  the  Conjiitutrve,Regent  part :  But 

he  confefleth  to  me,  that  he  fpake  not  what  is,  but  what  he  counts 

fhould  be,or  wifheth^  for  the  Dr.himfelf  had  before  toldus,that  the 

Convocations  of  Canterbury  and  Torl^  are /»w,  and  not  united  to 

make  oneNational^Jupreme  power  fa  that  this  proveth  no  one  political 

Church  of  England  at  all,but  only  2  Provincial  Churches  xnEnglandi 

$.  16.  The  Dr.  hath  fo  ;udiciou(ly  and  honeftly  pleaded  our 

Gaufe  in  his  defence  of  A.h'iihop  Laud^nd  his  Book  againft  Idola- 

*ry,that  I  have  made  his  words  the  firft  Chap,  of  this  Book,which 

g£  he  candidly  ftand  to,  I  fee  not  but  our  principles  are  the  fame; 

$.  17.  His 


$.17  His  book  is  made  up  of  3  parts.I.Untrue  Accufat'tons.II.lIn* 
trueHiftorical  Citations  (abundance).  III. Fallacious  P^eafonings. 

Would  you  have  an  undeniable  Confutation,  adhominem,  in 
few  words? 

I.  As  to  his  Principles,  he  faith  himfelf  as  aforefaid,  Of  Ido* 
lot.  p.  7.  We  are  Jure  that  wilful  ignorance, ox  chooftng  a  worfe  Church 
before  a  better,  k  a  damnable  fin. 

II.  As  to  his  Hiftory  of  the  old  Nonconformifis,  read  A.  Bifhop 
Bancrofts  dangerous  Pofitions,  and  Heylins  Hiftory  of  Presbyte- 
ry, charging  them  odioufly  with  the  clean  contrary,  and  the  Ca- 
nons made  againft  them  on  that  fuppofition. 

lII.As  to  his  Hiftory,  and  Dodtrine  againft  the  Ele&ion  of  Bps, 
which  I  pleaded  }  ("as  I  have  fully  proved  his  abufe  of  Hiftory  in 
it,)I  repeat  Wx.Thorndihgs  \vords,F  or  bear.of Penalty,  It  is  to  nopur- 
pofe  to  tall^of  Reformation  of  theChurchtoregidar  Government, with- 
cut  refloring  the  liberty  of  chooftng  BiJf)ops,and  priviledg  ofenjoying 
them  to  the  Synods,  Clergy  and  people,in  the  making  ofthofe  of  whom 
they  confifl,  and  by  whom  they  are  to  be  governed,  tbat  I  need  mak$ 
no  other  reafon  of  the  negleft  oj  Epiflopacy,  than  the  negleS  of  it. 

O  pray  hard  to  God  to  provide  greater  ftore  of  skilful,  holy 
and  peaceable  Labourers  for  his  Harveft,  that  by  the  found  be- 
lief of  a  better  world,  have  overcome  the  deluding  love  of  the 
honours,  profperity  and  pleafures  of  the  flefh,  and  wholly  live 
to  God  and  Heaven. 

POSTSCRIPT. 

Dr\.  Edward  StiUwgfleet  Irenic.P.  1 J  4.  faith,  TheEpifcopal 
men  will  hardly  find  any  evidence  in  Scripture,  or  in  the 
practice  of  the  Apoftles,  for  Churches  confiding  of  many  fixed 
Congregations  for  worfhip,  under  the  chargeof  onePaftor^  nor 
in  the  Primitive  Church,  fortheOrdination  of  aBilhop,  without 
the  preceding  Ele&ion  of  the  Clergy,  and  at  leaft,  confent  and 
approbation  of  the  people  5  and  neither  in  Scripture  nor  Anti- 
quity, the  leaft  foot-ttep  of  the  delegation  of  Church-power}  fo 
that  upon  the  matter  all  of  them  at  laft  make  ufe  of  thofc  things 
in  Church-Government,  which  have  no  other  foundation  but  the 
principles  of  humane  prudence,  guided  by  Scripture  5  and  itwerc 
well  if  that  were  obferved  ftill.  B  2  P.  370.  Surely 


P.  370.  Surely  then  their  Dioceflfeswe  re  not  very  large,  if  all 
the  feveral  Parities  could  communicate  on  the  fame  day,  with 
what  wasfent  from  the  Cathedral  Church. 

P.  361.4  doubt  not  but  to  make  it  appear,that  Philippi  was  not 
the  Metropolis  of  Macedonia,  and  therefore  the  Biftiops  there 
mentioned  could  not  be  the  Bilhops  of  the  feveral  Cities  under 
the  jurifdi&ion  of  Philippi,  but  muft  be  underftood  of  the  Bi- 
ftiops refident  in  that  City. 

P.  157.  There  muft  be  a  form  of  Ecclefiaftical  Government  o- 
ver  a  Nation,  as  a  Church,  as  well  as  of  Civil  Government  over  it 
as  a  Society  governed  by  the  fame  Laws. — For  every  Society  muft 
have  its  Government  belonging  to  it,  as  fuch  a  Society:  And  the 
fame  reafonthat  makes  Government  neceflary,  in  any  particular 
Congregation,  will  make  it  neceflary  for  all  the  particular  Con- 
gregations, joyning  together  in  one  vifible  Society,  as  a  particu- 
lar National  Church:  For  the  Unity  and  Peace  of  that  Church 
ought  much  more  to  be  lookt  after,  than  of  any  one  Congregation. 
jP.  131.  The  Churches  power,  as  to  Divine  Law,  beingonly 
dire&ive  and  declarative  5  but  as  confirmed  by  a  Civil  San&ion,is 
juridical  and  obligatory. 

P.  1 1 3.  Where  any  Church  rs  guilty  of  corruptions,  both  inDo- 
ftrine  and  in  pra&ice,  which  it  avoweth,  and  profeffeth,  and  requt- 
reth  the  owning  them,as  neceflary  conditions  of  Communion  with 
her  5  there  a  Noncommunion  with  that  Church  is  neceflary,  and 
a  total  and  pofitivefeparation  is  lawful  and  convenient. 

P.  117.  Where  any  Church  retaining  purity  of  Do&rine,  doth 
require  the  owning  of,  and  conformingto  any  unlawful,  orfufpe- 
&ed  pra&ice  5  men  may  lawfully  deny  Conformity  to,and  Commu- 
nion with  that  Church  in  fuch  things,without  incurring  theguilt  of 
Schifm---P.i  19-Let  men  turn  and  wind  themfelves  which  way  they 
will,by  the  very  fame  argument  that  any  will  prove  ftparat  ion  from 
the  Church  of  Romete wful,becaufe  (he  required  unlawful  things  a? 
Conditions  of  her  Communion  5  it  will  be  proved  lawful  not  to 
Conform  to  any  fufpe&cd,or  unlawful  pra&ice,^r.-They  lay  the- 
imputation  ofSchifm  on  all  them  who  require  fuch  Conditions  of 
Communion,  and  take  it  wholly  off  from  thofe  who  refufe  to 
Conform  for  Conscience  lake.  A  Pre- 


A  Premifed  explication  of   the  Equivocal 
word  CHVRCH. 


THE  word  [_  CHURCH]  being  Equivocal,  is  unfit  for  our  deputation, 
till  explained :  It  fignifieth  (  being  a  Relative  )  ieveral  forts  of  related 
Affemblies  :  which  are  diftmfi.  I.  In  their  Matter  :  A  C  hnrch  of  jews,  Turks, 
Chriftians,   of  Orthodox,  and  of  Hereticks,  being  not  one  thing. 

II.  In  the  Efficient :  A  Church  of  Gods  infticuting  ,  or  a  Church  of 
mans. 

III.  In  the  Fnds.  i.  *A *  Chriftian  Affembly  at  a  Fair,  or  Market,  or  Court 9 
$r  *Army,  &:•  is  not  the  fame  with  an  Affembly  for  Religious  exercifes .  2  Nor 
an- affembly  for  Legiflation  about  Religion  (in  Parliament  J,  or  Confuta- 
tion in  Synods,  or  Difputation  in  Schools,  the  fame  thing  as  an  AJfembly  for 
ftatedworflnp.  &c. 

IV.  In  the  Form,  or  Conftitutive  Relation  to  the  Correlate :  And  fo  the 
great  difference  which  now  concerneth  us  to  note  *r,  that  a  Church  of  Equals  in 
Office  and :  power*/  one  thing,  and  a  Political  Society,  rtlated  as  Gover- 
nours,  and  governed,  is  another. 

The  firfi  is  either  an  accidental  AfTembly,  or  elfe  a  defigned  Affemby  by 
confent. 

This  la  ft  is  either  an  t/fffemblyof  Lay- men,  which  may  be  agreed  hereafter 
to  come  under  Government  \  and  may  meet  to  worfhtp  God  without  a  Paftor  ', 
and  this  m  Politicks  is  ufually  called,  a  meer  Community.  2.  Or  an  isfffem- 
bly  of  Rulers  or  Paftor s  in  equality  (  as  to  Government  there  )  :  And  this  ie 
called,  a  Council,  Synod,  Dyet,  Parliament,  Convention,  &c. 
^%.  A  Governed,  or  Political  Church  is  of  Three  fever al  Species  (at 
leaft  )  as  there  are  three  Species  of  fuch  Government, 

I.  A  Chriftian  Family,  confifting  of  the  Family-  Government,  and  Govern- 
ed, living  together  in  holy  faith,  love,  trorfirip,  and  obedience  to  God\  the 
^JM after  being  their  Teacher ,  Ruler,  and  Guide  in  worfhtp. 

II.  A  Paftoral-Church,  confifting  of  one,  or  more  Paftor s,  and  Chriftian 
people  correlated  as  his  flock.  >  for  the  benefit  of  his  Paftor  al-  office,  which  effen- 
tially  containeth  a  power  to  teach  them,  lead  them  in  worftiip,  and  govern 
them  by  the  Keys,  as  a  Afinifterial  Judg,  who  is  fit  for  that  (fommmunion. 
Aft  together  is  called  alfo,  the  Power  of  the  Keys,  and  is  fubordinate  to 
Chrifts  Teaching,  Prieltly,  WRuHngO^ic*. 

III.  A  Royal,  or  Magiftratical  Church,  confifting  of  a  Chriftian  Sove- 
raign,  and  Chriftian  Subject,  to  be  ruled  by  \m  Jword,  or  forcing  power 
under  Chrift,  and  his  Laws,  for  the  fpiritual  and  temporal  welfare  of  the  Joci- 
$ty,  and  the  glorifying,  and  plcapng  the  Lord-Redeemer* 

And- 


,And\V.  The  Univerfat  Church  comprehtndeth  all  thefe  thrte  as  partly  and 
h  moft  excellently ,  properly,  and  fully  called,  the  Church,  confiftingof  Jefus 
Chrift  the cliefPaftor  (Teacher,  Prieft, and  King,  an  eminent  pcrfett  Policy  ) 
With  all  Q)riftians,as  the  fubjetl  part :  It  is  vifible  in  that  the  fub jells ,and  their 
profejfion,  and  worfljip  are  vifible  ;  aod  Chrift  wo*  vifible  on  earthy  is  vifible  in 
the  Court  of  Heaven,  his  Laws,  and  Providence  are  vifible,  and  he  willvifibty 
\udg  the  world,  and  reign  for  ever :  And  it  is  no  further  vifible.  The  con  ft  i- 
tuttve,  effential  parts,  are  only  Chrift  and  his  fubjett-body  :  The  nobleft,  or- 
ganical  parts  of  that  body,  are  Prophets,  Apoftles,  Evangeltfts,  Paftors,  and 
teachers* 

In  all  this,  note  i.  That  we  have  no  difference,  that  ltyowof,  about  the 
Church  in  any  of  thefe  fenfes  before  mentioned,  except, 

1 .  How  far  men  may  invent  (fhurch-forms  for  Gods  fervice  (  without  Gods 
particular  prefer 'ipt ,  er  inftitution  ). 

2.  Whether  it  be  true,  that  the  King  is  fo  perfona  mixta,  as  fame  hold,  as 
to  be  King  and  Prkft,  and  to  have  the  power  of  Church-Keys,  and  Word, 
tind  Sacraments. 

$.  Whether  over  and  above  the  loweft  Paftoral  Churches  Chrift  hatWinflttu* 
tedadirelh,  fuperior  Pa  floral  fort  of  Churches,  to  rule the inferior ,  in  Faith, 
Worfhip,  and  the  Keys  of  Difcipline,  over  Paftors  and  people  ?  And  if  fo, 
what  are  thefe  fuperior  ?  aft  oral  Churches,  whether  Dioce  fan,  Provincial,  Na- 
tional, Patriarchal,  Papal,  or  all  I  And  if  Chrift  made  no  finch,  whether  men 
may  n>a\e  them  f 

2.  And  note,  that  we  are  certainly  agreed,  that  the  Magiftratical  form  of 
forcing  power,  And  the  Paftoral  form  of  Sacerdotal  power  of  the  Keys,  are 
two,  though  the  fub)e£bs  floould  be  the  fame  (though  ufually  the  Church  is  in 
the  Commonwealth,  as  part):  And  none  of  hs  deny  a  Chriftian  Common- 
wealth, Monarchical ,  Ariftccratical,  or  Democratical',  and  though  fUk 
power  be  over  the  Paftoral  Church,  it  is  but  Accidental,  and  not  Eflential 
to  it. 

I.  And  note,  that  the  chief  questions  which  Iput  to  the  Dr.  about  this,  werey 

i.  What  is  the  Paftoral  ipecifying  form  of  the  Church  of  England?    And 

2   Whether  it  be  of  Divine  or  humane  Inftitution  :    And  I  have  brought  him  to 

mdnttin,  that  there  is  no  fuch  Church  of  England  at  all.   And  of  the  Royal 

Church  or  Kingdom  we  are  Members  as  well  as  he. 

4.  And  Laftly,  Note,  that  as  to  a  Paftoral  Church,  we  agree,  I  fuppcfe,  in 
diffiiguijhing  a  Tranfient,  and  a  fixed  relation.  And  as  he  that  is  a  Licenfed 
Phyfician,  atleth  as  fuch  where  he  cometh,  though  related  fixedly  to  no  Hofpi- 
tal,  fo  if  a  lawful  Minister  of  Chrift,  either  fixe  dm  another  Church,  or 
in  none  but  the  Vniverfal,  be  called,  pro  tempore,  for  a  day, to  do  his  office  in  a~ 
tf>they  Church,  he  atteth  as  Chrift s  Mini  ft  er,  and  their  ?  aft  or  for  that  daytj 
And  if  a  travelling  Chriftian  ]oyn  with  them,  he  is  a  Member  for  that  day: 

Tea, 


T*a,  if  the  whole  company  intend  to  meetlrut  that  one  day  hstjoe  fame  relation j9 
to  the  fame  ends,  it  is  a  temporary ,  transient  Paftoral  church.  'But  fixed  in- 
habitants for  order  and  edification,  ought  to  fix  their  relation  andpratlice. 

Though  moft  of  this  be  fat d  after,  where  he  calls  me  to  it,  J  thought  meet 
hereto  premife  the  Explication  of  the  word  Q  Church]  (as  m  divers  bcokj 
largely  I  have  done  of  the  word  [^Separation]  left  J  tmitate  him  in  leaving  my 
explication  to  the  hinder  party  and  we  fljould  depute  aboht  a  viord,  which  the 
Reader ,  and  perhaps  our  /elves  under fi and  not. 

But  we  have  a  greater  contr  over  fie  than  this,  rifen  fivce  A.  Btficp  Laud'/, 
and  Grotius'/  Reconciling  defign,  v  z.  what  the-  Catholick  vifible  Church  ut 

1.  Protefiants  have  hitherto  held,  as  the  firs}  point  of  difference  from  the 
*Papifts,  that  the  Univerial  Church  hath  noconftirutive  Head,  or  fupreme 
regent  Power  but  Chrift.  He  hath  fetledno  one,  Vicarious,  or  deputed  fu*. 
preme,  Monarchical,  Arifjtocratical,  or  Democratical. 

2.  ^Accordingly  they  noted  the  difference  of  two  forts  of  Paptfts,  fornix  that 
fet  the  Pope  as  fuperior,  above  Councils  \  others  (as  the  Council  of  Conftance, 
andBzhl,  and  the  French,  that  make  the  General  Council  fupreme,  the  Pope 
being  Prefident,  as  the  chief  of  the  Patriarchs,  and  having  many  priviledges, 
as  Primate  to  the  Vniverfal  Qourch. 

$,  But  that  in  truth,  the  Catholic^  governing  power  of  Pope,  and  the  other 
four  Patriarchs,  was  but  a  humane  form  of  Church  Policy  fet  led  in  one  Empire 
a*a  National  kind  of  Church,  and  the  Councils  were  Vniverfal  as  to  the  Em- 
pire, but  not  toall  the  Chriftian  world  (which  I  have  proved  again  ft  W.  John- 
fon  fully  )  cahd  by  the  Emperour  that  had  no  power  over  other  Nations,  and 
fubfcribed  by  his  fubjetls, 

4.  That  the  grand  cheat  that  hath  fet  up  Popery,  is  the  turning  this  Natio- 
nal Church  into  an  Univerfal  Government  of  all  the  Chriftian  world  \  and 
pretending  that  Chrift,  or  his  isfpoftles  fet  up  that  power  over  all,  which  Em* 
per  ours,  and  Imperial  Councils  fet  up  only  over  one  Empire. 

5.  We  are  f worn  again  ft  Forreign  rj  urifditlion  by  the  Oath  of  Supremacy. 
For  the  Roman  Empire-it  dtjfolved,  and  if  it  were  not,  we  are  no  fubjetls  of  it. 

6.  Tet  we  hold  that  all  Chriftians  flionld  live  in  all  poffibHe  love  and  concord, 
conn  felling,  and helping  one  another  for  the  edification  of  the  Churchy  and  thai 
fuch  fiuncils  are  ufeful  thereto ,  as  may  be  had  withont  more  hurt  than  good. 
But  that  no  Vniverfal  governing  power  be  fides  Chrift s  (  for  Legiflation,  fudg- 
ment,  or  Execution)  is  needful  to  that  concord;  nor  is  a  Government  of  the 
whole  Chriftian  world  by  any  one  Political  fupreme,  Pope  or  Council,  or  Col- 
ledgof  Paftors,  or  Cardinals,  any  more  poffibleor  lawful  to  be  fought,  than 
that  all  the  Kingdoms  on  earth  have  one  humane  civil  Sever  aign;  though  all 
Kings,  as  well  as  all  Bifho^s,  are  bound  to  ferve  Cod  with  thegrcateft  concord  - 
that  they  can  attain* 


But  now  he  that  will  read  many  late  Divines  of  England ,  will  find,  that 
they  are  come  to  this^  I.  1o  take  the  fore/aid  Conciliate  and  French  Papifts 
to  be  no  Papifts  *,  and  fo  to  make  it  a  contr over fie ,  de  nomine  ( in  which,  for 
vie,  let  them  have  their  liberty  ).  2.  To  take  it  for  a  necejfary  things  to  believe 
that  the  Universal  Church  in  the  world  hath  one  fupreme  governing  power 
under  Chrift,  and  is  a  Society,  that  is,  therein  vifibly  one.  And  $.  That 
this  one  ruling  powers  either  a  General  Council,  or  the  Colledg  ol  all  Bi- 
fhops  on  earth.  4.  <y4ndthat  the  Imperial  Church-form  was,  and  is  to  be 
the  true  Vnivcrfal  Church  form,  viz.  a  General  Council,  where  the  five  Pa- 
triarchs are  by  them/elves,  or  by  confent.  5.  And  that  the  Tope  is  Prefident, 
and  Principium  uniratis,  and  chief  Patriarch,  and  fo  to  be  obeyed  by  us* 
6.  And  that  there  is  no  true  way  to  Vniverfal  concord  but  by  being  of  this  one 
Church,  (b  formed,  and  obeying  its  Ihiverfal  Laws,  which  they  fay,  chrift 
hath  given  them  power  to  make.  7.  And  that  they  are  Schifmaticks y  and  not 
to  be  tolerated  that  do  not  fo  confent  and  obey.  8.  Tea,  fay  fome  to  us  in  En- 
gland, it  is  compelled  obedience  to  all  the  prefent  Impofkions,  which  only 
muft  cure  our  divifions,  without  abatement  for  Vnion,  or  any  Tolerations. 

A  great  deal  more  of  this  nature  is  built  on  this  principle,  that  the  Church 
in  all  the  earth  is  one,  asunder  one  humane  fupreme  Government,  under 
Ghrift,  and  that  all  are  Schifmaticks  that  are  not  of  it,  Wobey  it  not.  I 
am  not  for  difgracing  any  by  the  name  of  Papifts  that  refufe  it ',  whether  the 
French,  and  the  councils  of  Pifa,  Conftance  andBzfil  Jhall  be  called  Papifts 
I  contend  not :  But  whether  thofe  fatfe  principles  be  the  only  terms  of  concord% 
wife  men  will  cant elou fly  confide?* 


ADVERTISEMENT. 

THere  is  lately  Publifhed  a  Book  of  the  fame  Authors,  cal- 
led, A  Search  for  the  Englifl)  Schifmaticks  by  the  Cafe 
and  Characters  I.  Of  the  Diocefan  Canoneers.  2.  Of  the 
Prefent  Meet  Nov confer mijis.  Not  as  an  Accufation  of  the 
former,  but  a  neceffary  Defence  of  the  latter,  fo  far  as  they  are 
wrongfully  accufed  and  perfecuted  by  them.  And  is  to  be  fold 
by  Nevill  Simmons,  at  the  Sign  of  the  Three  Golden  Cockj  at 
the  Weft-end  of  St.  Pauls. 


A 


THE" 

CONTENTS. 

N  Hiftorical  Preface;  Dn  Stillingfleet's^W^^/rrfj//*  hishcni- 
-con. 

A  Premifed  explication  of  the  equivocal  word  Church.  Whkt  the  Catho- 
lick^Church  is  in  our  judgment ■,  and  what  in  the  judgment  of  many  of  cur  ft- 
lencers.* 

Chap.  i.  Dr.  Stiliingfleet' J  large  and  plain  Affer ting  of  our  principles  in 
his  Defence  of  Archbiftjop  Laud,   and  Rom.  Idolatry.  p.  I. 

OdZ^.l'Some  Animadverfions onhis  Preface :  W\nther  the  Jtfuitsftrft  brought 
in  Spiritual  Prayer.  A  full  explication  of  our  judgment  about  Spiritual 
Prayer.  His  hard  terms  againft  mens  (high  or  low)  chufing  Tutors  for 
their  Children. p.    ii. 

Chap.  i>Dr.  Stiliingfleet  his  Ace u fat ions  examined:  His  confufion  •  difputing 
a  queftion  not  ftated :  What  he  means  by  [Our  Church  ~]  by  Communion] 
ty[Conftant]6y  [Withdrawing]  by  [Separate  Congregations]  what 
Separation  /  am  for  or  againft.  Whether  he  fay  truet  that  wy  Tremen- 
dous aggravations  of  the  fin  of  Conforming  were  written  without 
the  leaft  provocation  on  their  part :  or  that  as  defigned  to  repre- 
fent  the  Clergy  as  notorious  Lying  perjured  Villains,       p.  22.  &c. 

Chap.  4.  His  falfe  Hiftory  of  the  old  Nonconformifts :  as  if  Bancroft's 
Danger.  Polit-    Heylin,  and  all  fuel)  old  accufers,  utterly  belyed  them, 
and  the  Canons  mxd:  againft  them  had  afalfefuppofition :  his  citations  ex- 
amined: More  proof  of  his  falfificat  ion  :  1  he  difference  between  the  Non- 
conformifts and  the  Brownifts.    How  we  are  ufed  by  them.    The  Refor- 
matio Legum  Ecckf.  how  much  for  difcipline.   I  now  add  my  rtcjueft  to 
the  Reader  that  would  know  how  far  the  firft  Reformers  were  of  the  Non- 
conformifts mind,  and  againft  our  new  Church-men^that  they  would  but  read 
Cranmers,  and  the  other  Drs.  words  cited  by  Dr.  Stiliingfleet  in  the 
end  of  his  Irenicon  (and  left  out  of  Dr.  Burnet's  Hiftory)  and  Bu- 

t  cerV 


The  Contents. 

cert  Scripta  Anglicana,  De  Regno  Dei,  his  Cenfura  of  the  Litur- 
gy, &  de  cura  Anim.   &o 
The  (lory  of  Dr.  Ames,  Paul  Bayne,  Dr.  Fulk,  &c.  Dr.  Humphrey's 
Letter  to  the  Bifhops, P*55>  5&>  57* — 

Chap.  5.  The  falfe  Reafoninn  and  accusations  of  his  fecond  part,       p.  59, 

My  judgment  and  cafe  ftated,  which  he  faljly  reporteth  :  Others  Cafes  con- 
fidered  Whether  j$  be  true, That  there  is  no  other  reafon  againfl;  Commu- 
nion than  was- at  the  firft  Reformation.  Difference  proved,  1 .  From  the 
things  impofed.  2.  From  the  defign  of  the  impofers.  $.  From  the  effects. 
4.  From  the  cafe  of  the  Church  with  whom  we  Communicate-  5.  From 
the  additional  reafons  for  our  Preaching,  p.  64. 

What  he  would  have  them  do  that  cannot  have  room  in  their  Churches,  p.  no. 
His  appeal  to    my  cafe  at  Kederminfter,  framed,  p.   71,  &o 

His  falfe  fuppofition  that  rnofi  of  my  Hearers  need  not  our  Teaching,  be- 
caufe  they  fometimes  hear  in  the  Parifh-Churches,  p.  73.  He  acquits 
them  from  Sehifme  that  feparate,  if  the  Church  be  Schifmatical,  74. 
(I  defire  the  Reader  then  to  Read  my  few  Sheets,  called  A  fearch 
for  the  Englifh  Schifmatick.)  More  miflakes.  p,  74  ^  fy 

Chap.  6.  Whether  he  be  no  Chriftian,  that  is  not  a  fixed  Member  of  a  par- 
ticular Church  ?  The  Dotlors  Schifmatical  Error  Confuted-,  p.  76.  (He 
by  this  condemneth  Apoflles,  and  Evangelifts  that  were  Itinerant  and  nn- 
fixedyfuch  as  Bucer  de  Regno  Dei  would  have  fent  abroad)  my  excepti- 
ons about  Churches  and  Miniflers  juflifiedandhis  Calumny  detetled,  p  80. 
Whether  I  give  too  much  to  the  People,  or  am  againfl  the  Rights  of  Patrons, 
or  Magiflrat.es ,  p.  82.  Many  more  Calumnies  to  p.  89.  He  accufethy 
tne,  as  accufingthem  for  naming  the  fins  that  I  dare  not  commit,  p.  89. 
More  of  his  vain  Accufations  to  p.  92.  Whether  he  be  for  filencing  us 
p.  92.  More  of  his  Calumny ,  p.  99.  Confiderable  Quere  to  him, 
p.  94.  Hew  he  w:uld  drive  men  to  Separation,  p.  95,  96.  He  is  come 
to  Self  condemning  Gentlenefs,  in  expounding  his  Rule  and Text,  Phil.  3. 
i<5.  p.  97.  His  fad  Er.numeration  of  the  caufes  ofjufl  Separation,    p.  98. 

Chap.  7.  He  begins  his  Third  Part  with  more  falfe  Accufations  y  p.  99* 
His  Hiftoryfor  Diocefan  Churches  againfl  Parochial  found  fallacious, 
p.  1  GO;  &o  His  vain  Plea  for  the  Englifh  Frame,  p.  io6,&c.  Ht 
faith,  Its  probable  while  the  Apoftles  lived  there  were  no  fixed  Bi- 
Jhops,  or  but  few,  p.  io3.  (  And  Dr.  Hammond  faith,  No  Subjeft 
Presbyters  J  whether  John  Fox  mre  the  Publifher  {or  Prsfacer)  of  the 


The  Contents. 

Reformatio  Legum,   &c.   p.  iop.    Difcipline  hard,  but  »9t  urtneceffaZ 
ry,  p.    in. 

Chap.  8.  What  the  National  Church  of England  is,  fully  difcuffed;  and 
the  Dotlors  Self  contrad'dions  detected:  He  denyeth  any  true  Political 
Church  0/ England:  He  and  we  more  agreed,  than  he  and  other  high 
Church-men^  that  are  for  a  Conftitutive  Political  Government,  p.  1 12, 
113,  &C.  He  maieth  it  an  introduction  of  Popery ,  to  hold  that  a  Chhrcb 
miift  have  a  Conflutive  Regent  Church-power  j  and  fo  fafteneth  Po» 
pery  on  the  Majlers  of  his  cauft. 

Chap.  9.  Ho at  the  mutual  Con fent  of  Pafiors  and  fiocl^is  necejfary  to  the 

very  being  of  their  Relation. 
About  Thirty  Proofs  from  Antiquity ,    that  the  Vmverfal  Church  was  for 

about  10  CO  years  of  that  mind,  and  decreed  it,  p.    128,  &C. 

The  necefftty  of  confent  proved  from  the  Nature  of  the  work  5  where  the  rea- 

fons  of  it  are  all  plainly  opened  p.  133.&C. 

7 he  Dotlors  contrary  furmifes  and  falfe  Hi fiories  fully  confuted^  p.  136, 

&C. 

Chap.  I O.  Of  the  impofed  Vfe  of  the  Crofs  in  Baptifme,  and  denying 
B  apt  if  me  to  the  refufe  rs.  p .     I  5  3 . 

His  vaine  excufes  confuted.  Whether  the  Crofs  be  ufed  as  a  Sacrament.  His 
difingenuous  falfifying  my  words  of  the  ufe  of  Crucifixes  and  other  Ima- 
ges, p.  156,  &C. 

What  the  Papifis  afcribe  to  Sacraments:  p.    ic&. 

Chap.  1 1.  Whether  the  Excommunicating  Churchy  or  the  Excommuni- 
cate  Nonconformist  jor  not  Communicating,  when  ipfo  facto  Excommunp- 
cate  y  be  guilty  ofSchifme.  p.  1 6  $;• 

Chap.  12.  Of  the  Englifn/orf  <?/Sponfors,  and  the  Ex dn fan  of  the  Pa- 
rents Duty.  p.   167.  (fee  more  in  the  Pofifcript) 

Chap.  1 3.  Of  the  three  French  Letters  which  hefubjoyneth.  p.  1  71,'. 

Chap.  14.  Epi files  and  Tefiimonies,  Compared  with  the  Doclors.  And. 
mtes  on  Mr.  Jo.  Glanviles  Book,  called  Tee  Zealous  Impartial 
Proteftant  /  With  a  Letter  of  his  to  the  Author  \  and  a  Digreffion  about: 

Dr.  Lewis  duMouliflj  his  Publ'tfnd  Picture  W  Death-bed  Repen- 
tance* 

A 


The  Contents. 

rAPofifvrtpt>  of  five  notices,  viz. 

i.  Of  a  new  Observation  of  the  Trade  of  taking  mony  to  be  Godfathers  to  Poor 
mens  Children,  and  miffing  B  apt  if  me  for  want  of mony '. 

2.  A  Letter  of  Mr.  W.  Rathbands,  of  his  Fathers  judgment  and  Prac- 
tice* 

'3.  An  Excellent  Confutation  of  Dr.  Stillingfleets  Hiftory,  of  the  ex- 
tent of  Diocefes,  and  Choice  of  Bifliops,  fully  proving,  that  the  old  Bi- 
fhsps  were  Parochial  or  Congregational,  and  always  chofen  by  the  People, 
or  not  made  theirs  without  their  free  Confent.  By  a  Learned  and  faith- 
ful  Minifter* 

4.  An  Excellent  Vindication  of  the  filenced  Minifiers  ,by  a  Conformift,  &c. 

5.  My  Apologie  for  the  Nonformifts  Preachings  Written  by  me,  and 
Comming  out  with  this. 


ERRATA. 

N  the  Preface,  Se£.   17.    line  13.  read  pleaded for.  1.    17.  after  Clergie  and  Pec 
,  fie,    add   #/  each  Diocefi.     So  Evident  is  the  right  ofSynids,  Clergie  and  People. 


CO 

A  N 

ANSWER 

T  O 

Dean  S  T  I  L  1  N  G  F  L  E  ET  S,  &c. 

C  H  A  P.  I. 

The  Conccrd  of  Dr.  Stiilengfleet  and  the  Ken  conform  ifls,  efpecial- 
ly  with  the  Principles  ef  my  Book  of  Church  Concord,  about 
ike  true  Nature  of  Schifm  ,  and  who  is  the  Schifmatic/^:  mitten 
by  him  at  age  in  his  mo  ft  owned  bocks,  and  not  in  youth  in  his 
lrenicon  :  I  ftand  to  all  my  words  again fh  Schijm  which  he  hath 
cited)  and  Jo  I  doubt  twt  but  he  Jlands  to  theje  following  of  his. 

Dlfcourfe  of  Idolatry  of  Rome,  p.  7.  c  ^Though  we  know  not  what 
allowances  God  will  make  for  invincible  ignorance,  we  are  Cure 
that  willful  Ignorance  or  CHOOSING  A'WORSE 
CHURCH  BEFORE  A  BETTER  IS  A  DAMNABLE 
SIN   and  unrepented  of  deiiroys  Salvation. 

Ihe  Papifls  confent,  p.  43.  c  [I  agree  fo  far  with  him,  that  every  Chr 
an  is  bound  to  choofe  the  Communion  of  the  purcft  Church;  but  which 
that  Church  is,  mult  be  iecn  by  the  grounds  it  brings  to  prove  the  Doct- 
rines it  teaches  to  have  been   delivered  by  Chrift  and  his  Apoiiles.     T 
Church  is  to  be  judged  purcft  that  hath  the  btil  grounds,  and  confccjuently 
it  is  of  neceility  to  Salvation  to  embrace  the  Communion  of  if. 

Pag.  1^4.  i5>5-  cj_i.  The  Churches  power  is  only  to  Edification  and 
not  to  difiru&ion:  tor  this  was  as  much  as  the  Apoftles  challenged  to 
themfelves",  and  I  hope  none  dare  challenge  it  ore  :  But  this  isa  prineir 
of  Natuial  reafen,    that  no  power  in  a  focicty  ought  to   be  extenc. 

B 


c  beyond  the  benefit  of  it,  or  to  contradict  the  end  and  deGgneofit.  2. 
cThe  Apoftles  were  the  molt  competent  Judges  of  what  made  for  the  Edi- 
c  fication  of  the  Church.  ] 

Pag.  216.  21 7.  c  [1.  It  is  agreed  on  both  (k!es  that  the  Scriptures  do 
ccontcme  in  th^m  the  unqueftionable  will  of  that  God  whom  we  are 
6  bound  toferve,  and  it  being  the  end  of  devotion  fas  it  ought  to  be  ofour 
c  lives)  to  ferve  him,  what  is  there,  the  mind  of  any  one  who  fincerely  de- 
'  iirestodo  it,  can  be  more inquifitive  after  or  fatisfyed  in,  than  the  rules 
c  God  himfdf  hath  given  for  his  own  fervicc  Becaufe  it  is  fo  cafiy  a  mat- 
c  ter  for  men  to  miftake  in  the  waies  they  choofe  to  ferve  him  in :  I  fee  the 

*  world  divided  more  fcarce  about  any  thing  than  this:  Pag.  218.  Can 
c  any  man  imagine  abetter  way,  ifitconld  be  hoped  for,  than  that  God  him - 
c  fclf  fhould  entcrpofe,  and  declare  his  own  mind  ,  according  to  what  way 
c  they  ought  to  ferve  him  I  And  this  is  acknowledged  to  be  done  already  by 
call  Chriftians  in  the  Scriptures,  and  after  all  this  muft  not  all  perfons  con- 

*  cerncd  be  allowed  to  enquire  into  that  which  is  owned  to  be  the  will  of  God, 
cor  do  they  think  that  ordinary  people  that  undcrftand  not  Latineand 
'Greek  ought  not  to  be  concerned  what  becomes  of  their  Souls?  If  they 
c  be  and  do  in  good  earned  defire  to  know  how  to  pleafe  God  and  ferve 
chim,  what  directions  will  they  give  him?  They  mull  do  as  they  are  bid" 
**  den~\AxM<z,  fay  they,  if  we  were  to  worfhip  you  for  Gods,  we  would  do 
1  as  you  bid  us  :  for  we  think  it  fitting  to  ferve  God  in  his  own  way :  But 
c  we  would  know  whether  that  God  whom,  we  ferve,  hath  given  us  any 
'Rules  for  his  worlhip  or  no.     How  (hall  we  know  whether  we  keep  them 

*  or  not,  or  will  you  take  upon  yottihe  guilt  of  our  fins  in  difobcying  his 
Svill?  This  feems  to  be  a  very  juft  and  reafonable  requeft,  and  I  fear  it 
c  will  one  day  fall  heavy  on  thofe  who  conceale  that  which  they  confefs  to  be 

*  the  will  of  God  \  from  the  knowledge  of  the  people. 

Tag*  54.8.  [I  agree  with  him  in  the  way  of  proof  of  a  Churches  purityr 
c  viz.  by  agreement  with  the  doctrine  ot  Chrift  and  his  Apoftles,  and  that 
wrhe  Church  is  to  be  judged  pureft,  which  (hews  the  greateft  Evidence  of 
'that  confent,  and  that  every  one  is  bound  to  enquire  which  Church  hath 

*  the  ftrongeft  motives  fork,  and  to  embrace  the   Communion  of  it. 

Pag.  5  65.  '[14.  To  fuppofe  the  books  fo  written  to  be  imperfect,  u  e. 
i  that  any  thing  necelTary  to  be  believed  or  PRACTISED  are  not  con- 
reined  in  them,  is  either  to  charge  the  firft  Author  of  them  with  fraud, 
c  and  not  delivering  his  whole  mind,  or  the  writers  with  infrncerity  in 
cnot  fating  it  down,  and  the  whole  Chriftian  Church  of  the  firft  ages 
fcwith  folly  ,  in  believing  the  fulnefs  and  perfection  of  the  Scriptures  in 
"order  to  Salvation.. 

tRead 


[  3  3 
Readthe  reft  of  thofe  excellent  Rules  to  rhc  end. 
In  his  excellent,  Vindication  of  Arch  Bifcop  Lai:d.c//W  A  Rational  account 
of  the  Proteltants  Religion,  be  bath   the  fame  tcrmes  of  Communion  and  the 
fame  defcription  of  Scbifm  with  mint  ,and  I  kporv  not  how  better  to  exprejr  my 
thoughts s  nor  plead  my  Vindication,  viz. 

Y>ag-  28^.  '  [In  his  defence  of  Arch  Bifhop  Laud  (riot  yet  difbwncdj 
c  fince  fo  great,  and  conliderable  parts  of  the  Chrifiian  Churches  havcia 
c  thefe  laii  ages  been  divided  inCommunionfrom  each  other,the  great  contel: 
'and  enquiry  hath  been  which  party  (lands  guilty  of  the  caufeof  the  prefent 

*  diftance  and  fcparation.  For  both  fides  retain  ftill  fo  much  of  their  com- 
'mon  Christianity  as  to  acknowledge  that  no  Religion  doth  foftridtly  ob- 
cligc  the  owf*€rso1  it  to  peace  and  unity  as  the  Cfiriftian  Religion  doth  ; 
'and  yet  notwithstanding  this,  we  find  thefe  breaches  fo  far  from  clof- 
4ing,  that,  fuppofing  the  fame  grounds  to  continue,  a  reconciliation  fecms 

*  to  humane  reafon  impoflible,  an  Evidence  of  which'  is,  that  thofe  per- 
'fons  who  either  out  of  a  generous  defire  of  feeing  the  wounds  of  the 
cChrifrian  world  healed,  or  out  of  fotne  private  intereft  or  defigne,  have 

*  made  it  their  bufinefs  to  propound  terms  o\  reconciliation  between  the 
'divided  parties  >  have  been  equally  rejected  by  thofe  parties  they  have 
'profeiTed  themfelves  the  members  of. 

Page.  190.  c  [The  diftance  then  being  fo  great  as  it  is,  it  is  a  very  necef- 
c  faty  enquiry  what  theCaufe  of  it  is,  and  where  the  main  fault  lies:  and  it 

*  being   acknowledged    that  there  is   a  poflibility   that    corruptions  may 
5  get  into  a  Chriitian  Church,  and  it  being  impoflible  to  prove  that  Chrifti- 
c  anity  obligeth  men  to  Communicate  with  a  Church  in  all  thofe  corrupti- 
ons its  communion  may  be  tainted  with,  it  feems  evident  to  reafon  that 
cthccaufc  of  the  breach  muft  lie  there,  where  the  corruptions  are  own* 
ced,  and  impofed  as  conditions  of  communion.     For  can  any  one  imagine 
c  it  (hould  be  a  fault  in  any  to  keep  off  from  communion,  where  they  arc 
cfo  far  from  being  obliged  to  it,  that  they  have  an  obligation  to  the  con- 
trary from  the  principles  of  their  common  Chrifnanity/  And  where  men 
care  bound  not  to  communicate,  it  is  impoflible  to  prove  their  not  com- 
cmunicating  to  be  Schifm.     For  there  cm  be  no  Sehifnv,  but  where  there 
cis  an  obligation  to  communion  ',  Schifm  being  nothing  eKebuta  willful 
'"violation  of  the  bonds  Chriliian  communion.     And  therefore  whenever 
cyou  would  prove  the  Protefiants guilty  of  Schifm,  you  muft  do  it  by  prov- 
ing they  were  bound  to  communicate  with  your  Church   in  thofe  things 
c  which  they  are  Proteftants  for  difowning  of,  or  that  there  is  (o  abfolute 
•  and  unlimited  an  obligation  to  continue  inthefociety  of  your  Church, 
'  that  no  conditions  can  be  fo  hard,  but   wcare  bound  rather  to  lubmit 

B  2 


[43 

to  them,  then  not  joyn  in  Communion  with  you. 

1  This  being  a  matter  of  fo  vaft  confequence  in  order  to  the  fetling  mens 
minds  in  the  prefent  difputes  of  the  Christian  world,  before  I  come  to 
particulars,  I  (hall lay  down  thofe  general  principles  which  may    mani- 
feft  how  free  Proreftants  are  from   all  imputation    cf  Schifm.     Schifm 
then  importing  a  violation  of  that,  communion  which  we  are  obliged  to 
the  mort  natural  way  for  undei Handing  what  Schifm  is,  is  to  enquire 
c  what  the  foundations  ate  of  Chriftian  communion,  and  how  far  the  bounds 
.  of  it  do  extend.     Now  the  Foundations   of  Chriftian   communion  in 
'general  depend  upon  the  acknowledgment  of  the  truth  of  Chriftian  Re- 
ligion.   For  that  Religion  which  Chrift  came  to  deliver  to  the  world 
being  fuppofed  true,  is   the  reafon  why  any  look  on  themfelves  as  ob- 
liged to  profefs  it  >  which  obligation  extending  to  all  perfons  who  have 
the  fame  grounds  to  belcive  the  truth  of  it,  thence  arifeth  the  ground  of 
''fociety  in  thisprofeffion,  which  is  a  common  obligation  on  feveral  perfons 
joyning  together  in  fome  acts  of  common   concernment  to  them.     The 
truth  then  of  Chriftian  Religion  being  acknowledged  by  feveral  perfons, 
'  they  find  in.  this  Religion  fbme  actions  which  are  to   be  performed  by 
"feveral  perfons  in  fociety  with  each  other.    From  whence  arifeth  thac 
'more  immediate  obligation  to  Chriftian  fociety  in  all  thofe.  who  profefs 
1  themfclv.es  Chrillians  >  and  the  whole  number  of  thefe   who  own  that 
^truthof  Chriftian  Religion,  and  are  thereby  obliged  to  jovn  in  fociety 
c  with  each  other,  is  that  which  we  call  the  Catholic^  Church.    But  al- 
though there  be  fuch  a  relation  to  each  other  in  all  Chriftiansas  to  make 
*"them  one  common  fociety,  yet  for  the  performance  of  particular  acts  of 
'communion,  there  mil  ft  be  lefler  focieties  wherein  perfons  may  joyn-  to- 
c  gether  in  the  actions  belonging  to  them.     But  ftill  the  obligation  to  com- 
^munion  in  thefe  lciTer  is  the  fame  with  that  which  conilitutes  the  great 
''body  of  Chriftians,  which  is  the  owning  Chriftianityas  the  only  true  Re- 
'ligionand  way  to  eternal  happinefs.     And  therefore  thofe  lelTer  focieties 
^cannot  in  juftice  make  the  neccfllity  conditions  of  Communion  narrower  than 
1  thofe  which  belong  to  the  Catholic]^  Curcb^  i.  e.  thofe  things  which  de* 
'dare  men  Chriftians  ought  to   capacitate   them  fop  communion  with 
10  Chriftian?. 

c  But  here  we  are  to  confider  that  as  to  be  a  Chriftian  fuppofeth  mens 

c  owning  the  Chriftian  Religion  to  be  true,  fo  the  conveyance  of  that  Reli- 

c  gion  being  now  to  us  in  thofe  books  we  call  the  Scriptures,  there  mull  be 

5  an  acknowledgment  of  them  as  the  indifpenfablerule  of  faith  and  man- 

cners,  which  is,  that  thefe  books  are  the  great  Charter  of  the  Chriftian 

€  iociety  according  to  which  it  muft  be  governed. 

c  Thefe 


C5l 

1  Thefe  things  being  premiCcd  as  the  foundation  in  general  of  Ch rift  ran 
fociety,  we  ["hall  the  better  under/land  how  far  the  obligation  to 
munion  in  it  doth  extend.  For  wh  ch  it  mull  be  conlidered  that  the 
grounds  of  continuance  in  communion  mult  be  fuitable  and  proportion- 
able to  the  iirft  reafon  of  cntringintor.  No  man  being  obliged  by  virtue 
of  his  being  in  a  fociety  ,  to  agree  in  anything  that teads  to  the  apparent 
ruinof  that  fociety :  But  he  is  obliged  to  the  contrary,  Irom  the  general 
grounds  of  his  fixit  admillion  into  it.  His  primary  obligition  beng  to 
preferve  the  honour  and  intcreltof 'it,  and  to  joyninadls  ot  it  fo  far  as 
they  tend  toit.  Now  the  main  end  of  the  ChrilMan  fociety,  being  the 
promotion  of  Gods  honour,  and  Salvation  ot  mens  Souls,  the  primary 
obligation  of  men  entring  into  it,  is  the  advancement  of  theft  ends  to 
joyn  in  all  acts  of  itfo  far  as  they  tend  to  thefe  ends  >  but  if  any  thing 
come  to  be  required  dircclly  repugnant  to  thefe  ends ,  thofe  men  of 
whom  (uch  things  are  required  ,  are  bound  not  to  communicate  in  thofe 
lelTer  focieties  where  fuch  things  are  impofed,  but  to  prefeive  their  com- 
munion with  the  Catholick  focictie  of  Chriftians. 

Tag.  291.  c  Setting  then  afide  the  Catholick  fociety  of  Chriftiai  s,  wc 
ccme  to  enquire  how  far  men  are  bound  to  communicate  with  any  Icfs, 
(bciety  how  extenfive  foever  it  may  pretend  it's  communion  to  be.  1. 
There  is  no  fociety  of  Christians  of  any  one  communion  ,  but  may  fm- 
pofe  fome  things  to  be  beleived  or  pra&iftd  which  may  be  repugnant  to 
the  general  Foundation  of  Chriftian  fociety. 

Tag.  2^2.   c  2.  There  beinga  poiTibility  acknowledged  that  partk 
Churches  may  require  unreafonable  conditions  of  communion,  the 
ligation  to  communion  cannot  be  abfolute  and  indifpv: 
fo  far  as  nothing  is  required  defirudrive  to  the  ends  of  Christian  Soc 
Otherwife  men  would  be  bound  to  deiFroy  that  which  they  beleive,  and 
to  dothe  molt  unjuftand  unreafonable  things.     But  the  greater  difr;. 
lies  in  knowing  when  fuch  things  are  required,  and  who  muft  be 
judge  in  that  cafe, to  which  I  anfvver. 

c  3.  Nothing  can  be  more  unreafonable  than  that  the  fbcic  I 
"fuch  conditions  of  communion  mould  be  judge,  whether  thole  conditt- 
ens  be  jufi  and  equitable  or  no.     If  the  quertion  were  o^.ly  in  matt, 
peace,  convenieney,   and  order,  the  judgment  of  the  (bciety  ought  fo 
over -rule  the  judgments  of  particular  perfons>  but  in  fuch  caL 
great  bodies  of  Chriftians  judge   fiwh  things  required   to  be  unlawful 
conditions  of  communion,  what  Jufi  ice  or  reaion  is  there  that  the  ; 
cvjkd  mould  fit  Judge  in  her  own  caufe  ? 

1  4.  Where  there   is   fuflicient  evidence  from  Scripture,    reafon  and' 

B  5  c  tradi  i  > 1 


16-} 

tradition  that  fuch  things,  which  are  impofed,  are  unreaionable  conditions 
of  Chriftian  Communion,  the  not  communicating  with  that  Society , 
which  requires  thefe  things  cannot  incur  the  guilt  of  Schifm,  which  ne- 
cefTarily  follows  from  the  precedent  grounds,  becaufenone  can  be  oblig- 
ed to  Communion  in  fuch  cafes,  and  therefore  the  not  communicating  is 
no  culpable  feparation. 

Pag.  324.  c  His  Lordlhip  delivers  hisfenfe  clearly  and  fully  in  thefe 
Words*  *Tis  too  true  indeed,  that  there  isa  miferable  rent  in  the  Churchy 
and  I  make  no  queftionbut  the  bell*  men  do  molt  bemoan  it  j  nor  is  he 
a  Chriftian,  thit  would  not  have  Unity,  might  he  have  it  with  Truth. 
But,  Ineverfaidor  thought,  that  the  Protectants  made  this  rent.  The 
Caufe  of  the  Schifm  is  yours  >  for  you  thruft  us  from  you,  becaufe  we 
call'd  for  truth,  and  rcdrefs  of  abufes.  For  a  Schifm  muft  needs  be  theirs, 
whofe  the  caufe  of  it  is.  The  IFoiuns  full  out  of  the  mouth  of  Chrift 
ever  againft  him  that  gives  the  offence*  not  againft  him  that  takes  it 
ever. 

Page  325.  CI  do  fay  it  now*  and  mod  true  it  is,  That  it  was  ill  done 
of  thole,  whoe're  they  were,  who  firft  made  the  Separation.  But  then 
A.  C.  muft  not  underhand  me  of  adtual  only,  but  of  caufal  Separation. 
For  (  aslfaid  before^  the  Schifm  is  theirs,  whofe  the  caufe  of  it  is: 
and  he  makes  the  Separation,  that  gives  the  rirft  juft  caufe  of  it  >  not  he 
that  makes  an  aclual  Separation  upon  a  juft  Caufe  preceding.  And  this 
is  fo  evident  a  Truth  ,  that  A.  C.  cannot  deny  \t,  for  he  fays  it  is  moft  true. 

lhat  the  Reader  may  clearly  under/land  the  fall  State  of  this  Controverfie 
concerning  Schifm  '-,  the  upjhot  of  which,  is,  that  it  is  agreed  between  bothp'r- 
tiesy  that  all  Separation  from  Communion  with  a  Church  doth  not  involve  in  it 
the  guilt  of  Schifm^  but  only  fuch  a  Separation  as  hath  no  fufficient  caufe  or 
ground  for  it. 

Page  13 1.  c  There  can  be  no  Separation  from  the  whole  Church,  but  in 
fuch  things  wherein  the  unity  of  the  whole  Church  lies  »  for  Separation 
isa  violation  of  fome Union  :  Now  when  men  feparate  from  the  errors 
of  all  particular  Churches,  they  do  not  feparate  from  the  whole,  becaufe 
thofe  things,  which  one  feparates  from  thofe  particular  Churches  for,  are 
not  fuch,  as  make  all  them  put  together  to  be  the  whole  or  Catholick 
Church.  This  muft  be  fomewhat  further  explained.  There  are  two 
things  confiderable  in  all  particular  Churches  >  thofe  things  which  be- 
long to  it  as  a  Church  >  and  thofe  things  which  belong  to  it  as  a 
particular  Church.  Thofe  things  which  belong  to  it  as  a  Church, 
are  the  common  ligaments  or  grounds  of  Union  between  all  parti- 
cuter  Churches,    which  taken  together  maxke  up  the  Catholick  Church  : 

1  Thofe 


'Thofe  things  which  belong  to  it  as  a  particular    Church,  ai: 
lit  may  retain  the  elTcnce  of  a  Church  without.     Now.  i 
'ever  feparates  from  any    particular  Church  (much   more    fxoi 
libr  fuch  things  without  which  that  can  be  no  Church,  fepara:. 
'the  Communion  of  the  Catholick  Church  :  but  he  that  fcpara 
'  from  particular  Churches,  as  to  fuch  things  which  concern  nc: 
cisonely  fepantid  from  the  Communion  of  thofe  Churches,  ar,d  nc  \ 
'Catholick.     And  therefore  fuppofmg  that  all  perticular  Churches 
cfome  errors  and    corruptions  in  them,  though  I   mould  frparare  from 
'them  all,  I  do  not  feparate  from  the  Communion  of  the  whole  Chi.; 
'unlefsit  be  for  fomething,  without  which  thofe  could  be  no  Cbufd 
'An  evidence  of  which,  is,  that  by  my  declaring  the  grounds  of  my  fepa- 
'  ration  to  be  fuch  Errours  and  corruptions,  which  are  crept  into  the  Com- 
'munion  of  fuch  Churches,  and  impofed  on  me  in  order  to  it,  I  withal 
'declare  myreadinefs  tojoynwith  them  again,  if  thofe  errours  and  cor- 
ruptions be  left  out.     And  where  there  is  this  readinefs  of  Communion, 
'there  is  no  abfolute  reparation  from  the  Church  as  fuch,  but  only  fufpen- 
'  ding  Communion  till  fuch  abufes  be  reformed:  which'is  therefore  more 
'properly  a  feparation  from  the  errors,  than  the  Communion  of  fuch  a 
'Church,  wherefore  if  we  fuppofe,  that  there  is  no  one  vilible  Church, 
c  ivhofe  Communion  is  not  tainted  with  fome  corruptions  though  ift! 
c corruptions  beinjoyntd  as  conditions  of  communion  ,  I  cannot  commit 
'nicate  with  any  of  thofe  Churches,  yet  it  followes  not  that  I  am  fcpara- 
'ted  from  the  external  Communion  of  the  Catholick  Church,  but  that  I 
'only  fufpend  Communion  with  thofe  particular  Churches,  'till  I  may  fafc- 
*ly  joyn  with  them.     As,  fuppofe  all  the  particular  men  1  can  convei 
'with,  were  infected  with  Lcprofie,  my  not  affociatng  with  than,  d 
'not  imply  that  lam  feparated  from  the  Communion  of  all  Mankind,  but 
'that  I  am  loath  to  be  infected  as  they  are,  and  therefore  withdraw  my 
'felf,  till  I  can  meet  with  fuch  healthtul  per  fons  with  whom  I  may  (aft 
^alTociateagain.     Andiffeveral  other  perfons  beof  the  fame  mind  with 
'me,  and  we  therefore  joyn  together,  do  we  therefore  divide  our  k 
'from  the  whole  World  by  only  taking  care  of  our  own  fafety  ?  And  efpc- 
'ciallyif  any  company  of  fuch   leprous  perfons  thould  refolve  that  n 
'fhould  live  among  them,  but  fuch  as  would  cat  of  thofe  meats  which 
'  brought  that  difkmper  upon  them,  our  withdrawing  our  (elves and  all 
'dating  without  them  will  /til I  appear  more  reafonable  and  commenda- 
*ble.     Therefore  we  fay,  we  do  not  neccilarily  feparate  from  aiJ  Chi 
'chesthat  have  errors  or  corruptions  in  them,  fu ppofing  thofe  errors  and 
'corruptions  be  not  impofed  on  us,  ditions  of  communion >  and 


m 

x  r  hence  though  we  mould  grant ,  no  one  vifible  Church  free  from  faint 
cor  corruption,  yet  it  is  not  needfary  we  fhould  feparate  from  them  all: 
'for  we  may  lawfully  joy  ne  in  communion  with  Churches  having  error 
cand  corruptions,  if  cur  joyning  be  not  an  approbation  of  them.  Thus 
c  though  the  C 'reekj ,  Armenians,  Albigenfzr^  Abyffins  may  have  fbme  errors  , 
cor  corruptions,  yet  if  they  be  not  fundamental,  and  be  not  joyned  as  ne- 
'ceilary  to  be  approved  in  order  to  their  communion  ,  notwithstanding 
cfhem,  we  may  lawfully  communicate  with  them,  it  doth  not  then  at 
c  all  follow,  that  if  there  may  be  no  one  vifible  Church  free  from  error 
cand  corruption,  it  would  benecelTary  to  feparate  from  the  communion  of 
c  the  Catholick  Church:  Becaufe,  i.  All  thofe  particular  Churches  may 
4  not  make  thefe  errors  conditions'of  communion.  2.  Though  they  did 
c  we  feparate  not  from  them  as  Catholick,  but  as  corrupt  and  erroneous 
4  particular  Churches 

Pag.  355.  4  To  redli  fie  fuch  grofsmifukes  as  thefe  are  for  the  future 
cyou  would  do  well  to  underhand  that  Schifm  formally  taken  alwaiesim- 
'  ports  fomething  criminal  in  ir,  and  there  can  be  no  jufl  caufe  for  a  fin  > 
c  But  befides  that  there  is  that  f  which  if  you  under/land  it  J  you  would 
'call  the  materiality  of  it,  which  is  the   reparation  of  one  part  of  the 
c  Church  from  another.     Now  this  according  to   the  different   grounds 
''and  reafonsof  it,  becomes  lawful  or  unlawfull,.  that  is,  as  the  reaionsdo 
"make  it  neccflaryor  unnecclTary,  for  fe  pa  rat  ion  is  not  lawfull  but  when 
c it  is  ncceffary  i  Now  this  being  capable  of  fuch  a  different  nature  that  it 
c  may  be  gcod  or  evil  according  to  its  circumfhnces,  there  can  be  no  abfolute 
'judgment  paflcd  upon  it  ,    till  all  thofe  reafons  and   circurnfhnces  be 
cdue!y  examined,  and  if  there  be  no  fufficient  grounds,  for  it  then  it  is  for- 
'mally  Schifm  /.  e.  a  culpable  feparation  •,    If  there  be  fufficient  caufe 
'then  there  may  be  a  feparation,  but  it  can  be  no  Schifm.     And  bccaule 
'the  union   of  the  Catholick  Church  lies   in  fundamental   and  neceiTary 
c  truths,  there  fore  there  can  be  no  feparation  abfolutcly  from  the  Catholick 
c  Church,  but  what  involves  in  it  the  formal  guilt  of  Schifm  ••>  it  being  im« 
c  poffibleany  perfon  mould  have  juli  caufe  to  difown  the  Churches  corn- 
"munionfor  any  thing  whofe  beleif  is  neccflary  to  Salvation.     And  who- 
'  foever  doth  fo,  thereby  makes  himfelf  no  member  of  the  Church,  becaufe 
c  the  Church  fubii/ts  on  the  beleif  of  fundamental  truths.     But  in  all  fuch 
c cafes  wherein  a  divifion  may  be  made,  and  yet  the  flveral  perfons  divid- 
ed retain  the  elTentialsofa  Christian  Church,  the  feparation  which  may 
cbe  among  any  fuch  mult   be  determined  according  to  the  caufes  of  ir. 
cFor  it  being  poiTible  of  one  fide  that  men  out  of  capricious  humours  and 
fancies  renounce  the  communion  of  a  Church  which  requires  nothing 

<bu* 


[9] 

But  what  isjuftand  rcafonable:  And  it  being  pcflibleon  theotrK 
'that,a  Church,  calling  her  felf  Catholick,  may  fo  far  degenerate  in  1 
cand  Practice,  as  not  only  to  be  guilty  of  great  Errors  and  corrupt!. 
c  but  to  impofe  them  as  conditions  of  Communion  with  her,  it  is  ncccf- 
ciary,  where  there  is  a  manifeft  feparation,  to 'inquire  into  the  rea:     * 
'  and  grounds  of  it  i  and  to  determine  the  nature  of  it  according  to    * 
cJufticeofthecaufe,  which  is  pleaded  for  it. 

Page  357.  '  The  Catholick  Church  therefore  lies  open  and  free,  like  a 
c  Common  field  to  all  inhabitants.  Now  if  any  particular  number  of 
c  thefe  Inhabitants  (hould  agree  together  to  enclofe  pare  of  it  without  con^ 
cfent  of  the  reh\and  not  to  admit  any  others  to  that  right  of  Comrrx  n,with- 
'outconfentingto  it,  which  of  thefe  two  parties,  thofe  who  deny  toycild 
1  their  confent  \  or  fuch,  who  deny  their  rights,  if  they  will  not  ,  are 
'  guilty  of  the  violation  of  the  publick  and  common  rights  of  the  place  ? 

Page  358.  'Although  nothing  feparates  a  Church  properly  from  the 
'Catholick,  but  what  is  contrary  to  the  being  of  it  j  yet  a  Church  may 
'feparate  her  felf  from  the  Communion  of  the  Catholick  by  taking  upon 
c  her  to  make  fuch  things  the  necelTary  conditions  of  her  Communion, 
c  which  never  were  the  conditions  of  Communion  with  the  Catholick 
c  Church. 

Page  35p.  *  Since  it  appears  that  the  Communion  of  the  Catholick 
c  Church  was  free  for  many  hundred  years  without  approving  or  uiing 
'  the&  things  h  that  Church,  which  (hall  not  only  publ.'ckly  ufe,but  enjoy n 
'fuch  things  upon  pain  of  Excommunication  from  the  Church,  doth  as 
'much as  in  her  lies  draw  the  bounds  of  Catholick  Communion  within 
'herielf^  and  fo  divides  her  felf  from  the  true  Catholick  Church.  For 
'  whatever  confines  muftlikewife  divide  the  Church,  for  by  that  con finc- 
'  ment  a  feparation  is  made  between  the  part  confined  and  the  other, 
'  which  feparation  muft  be  made  by  tie  Party  fo  limiting  Communion. 
c  As  it  was  in  the  Cafe  of  the  Donatifis,  who  were  therefore  charged  with 
'  Schifmc,  becaufethey  confined  the  Catholick  Church,  within  theirown 
'  bounds :  And  if  any  other  Church  doth  the  fame  which  they  did,  it  muir 
'  be  liable  to  the  fame  charge  that  they  were.  The  fum  of  this  difcourfc 
'is,  that  the  being  of  the  Catholick  Church  lies  in  ElTentials,  that  for  a 
'particular  Church  to  difagrce  from  all  other  particular  Churches  in  fbmc 
'  extrinikal  and  accidental  things  is  not  to  feparate  from  the  Catholick 
*  Church,  fo  as  to  ceafe  to  be  a  Church:  Cut  (till  whatever  Church  makes 
'fuch  extrinfical  things  thenecclTary  conditions  of  Communion,  fo  as  to 
'calf  men  out  of  the  Churchy  who  ycild  not  to  them,  isSchifmatical  in  fo 
'doing*,  Fork  thereby  divides  it  felf  from  the  Catholick  Church  :  And 

C  Ubz 


[>3 

*  the  reparation  from  it  is  fo  far  from  being  Schifm,  that  being  caft  <Jut 
'of  that  Church  on  thofe  terms  only,  returns  them  to  the  Communion  of 
'  the  Catholick  Church.  On  which  grounds  it  will  appear  that  yours 
1  is  the Schifmatical  Church  and  not  ours:  For  although  before  this  im- 
5  poling  humor  came  into  particular  Churches,  Schifm  was  defined  by  the 
'Fathers  and  others  to  be  a  voluntary  departure  out  of  the  Church,  yet 
1  that  cannot  in  reafon  be  underftood  of  any  particular,  but  the  true  Ca- 

*  tholick  Church  For  not  only  perfons  but  Churches  may  depart  from 
'  the  Catholick  Church  :  And  in  fuch  Cafes  not  thofe,  who  depart  from 
c  the  Communion  of  fuch  Churches,  but  thofe  Churches,  which  departed 
c  from  the  Catholick  are  guilty  of  Schifm.  Thefc  things  I  thought  neccf- 
'  fary  to  be  further  explained,  not  only  to  (hew  how  falfe  that  imputati- 
'  on  is,  of  our  Churches  departing  from  the  true  Catholick  Church  >  but 
'  with  what  great  reafon  we  charge  your  Clmrch  with  departing  from  the 
'  communion  of  it  j  and  therefore  not  thofe  whom  you  thrtift  out  of  Com- 
'  munion*  but  your  Church  fo  thrufting  them  out,  is  apparently  guilty  of 
cthe  prefent  Schifm. 

Page  366.  'The  truth  is  fuch  pretences  as  thefeare,  are  fit  only  for  a 
c  Church  that  hateth  to  be  reformed  >  for  if  fomething  not  good  in  it 
cfelf  mould  happen  in  anyone  Age  tooverfpread  the  vifible Communion 
c  of  all  particular  Churches,  this  only  makes  a  Reformation  more  necefla- 
cry,  fo  far  is  it  from  making  it  more  difputable.     For  thereby  thofe  cor - 

*  ruptions  grow  more  dangerous,  and  every  particular'  Church  is  bound 

*  the  more  to  regard  its  own  fecurity  in  a  time  of  general  infection.  And 

*  if  any  other  Churches  neglecl:  themfelves ,  what  reafon  is  it  that  the 
'reft  mould  ?  For  any  or{  all  other  partciular  Churches  neglecting  their 
'duty,  is  no  more  an  Argument,  that  no  particular  Church  mould  re- 

*  tbrm  it  fclf,  than  that  if  all  other  men  in  a  Town  neglect  preferving 
c  themfelves  from  the  Plague,  then  I  am  bound  to  neglecl:  it  too. 

Bage  540.  c  Every  Church  is  bound  to  regard  her  own  purity  and 
c  peace ,  and  in  cafe  of  Corruptions  to  proceed  to  a  Reformation  of 
-  them. 

Page  541.  Saint  Angufthie  faith  not  only  in  that  place,  but  in  very 
many  others,  that  Saint  Peter  did  fuftain  the  Perfon  of  the  Church, 
1  when  Chrift  laid  to  him,  I  will  give  thee  the  Keyes  of  the  Kingdom  of 
c  Heaven. 

1  That  he  did  univerj am  fignificareEcclefiam ,fignifie  the  whole  Church  ;  and 
'  that  thofe  things  which  are  fpokenof  Peter,  mm  babent  illuftrem intellettum 

*  nifi  cum  referuntur  ad  Ecchfiam^CHJHf  Me  agnofcitut  in  figura  gefiajfi  perfonam, 
4  hive  no  clear  fenfe,  but  when  they  are  referred  to  the  Church,  whole  per* 
c  Ion  he  did  bear.  Page 


C»3 

Tag.  542  c  He  means  the  formal  right  of  ttem  was  conveyed  to  the 
c  Church,  and  that  Saint  Petet  was  only  a  publick  perfon  to  receive  them 

*  in  the  name  of  the  Church. 

'  It  primarily  and  formally  refides  in  the  whole  body  of  the  Church; 

'  ?ag»  544«  His  Lordfhip  faith  your  opinion  is  yet  more  unreafbnable  fc 
c  becaufe  no  body  collective,  whenfoevrr  it  afiembled  it  felf,  did  ever  give 
'more  powertothereprefenting  body  of  it^than  a  binding  power  upon  it  felf 
6  and  all  particularsjnor  ever  did  it  give  this  power  otherwife  than  with  this 
'rcfervation  in  nature,  that  it  would  call  again  and  reform,  and  if  need 
c  were,abrogate  any  law,  or  ordinance  upon  juftcaufe  made  evident,  that 

*  the   reprcfenting  body  had  failed  in  truft,  or  truth.     And   this  power 
c  no  body  collective,  Ecclefiaftical  or  Civil  can  put  out  of  it  felf,  or  give 

*  away  to  a  Parliament  or  Council ,  or  call  it  what  you  will,  that  re* 
c  prefents  it. 

'His  Lordubip  faith  that  the  power  which  a  Council  hath  to  order 
c  fettle  and  define  differences  arming  concerning  faith,  it  hath  not  by  an  im- 
c  mediate  inftitution  from  Chrift,but  it  was  prudently  taken  up  by  the 
c  Church  from  the  Apoftles  example. 


CHAP.    II. 

Some  Animadversions  on  his  Preface. 

^  1,  *«r*HE  impartial  fearchers  after  truth,  have  hitherto  thought  that 
JL  a  ftrid  method  (at  leaft  agreeable  to  natural  Logick )  is  more 
effectual  than  confufion  or  wordy  popular  haranges :  And  that  the  con- 
troverfie  (hould  be  very  cleerly  Rated  before  it  can  be  profitably  argued  : 
And  therefore  that  rirltall  ambiguity  of  terms  be  by  due  explication  re- 
moved, that  men  may  not  mean  feveral  things  and  not  underftand  each 
other  >  and  to  Define  and  dijliriguijh  where  it  is  needful,  and  then  Affirm 
or  deny,  and  then  effectual)  prove.  But  why  this  worthy  perfon  doth  far 
otherwife  with  us,  both  before  and  now,  it  is  more  his  partthan  mine  to 
give  the  reafon :  I  dare  net  fay  he  cannot  •,  Not  I  dare  not  fay5hecan,  but 
will  not ,  but  all  that  I  ctn  fay  is  that  be  doth  ret ,  and  I  know  not 

why. 

$2.  The  Preface  of  his  Book  called  Vnreafonablenefs^  <kc.  Is  fo  much 
anfwered  already  by  Mr.  Lcby  that  I  will  not  lofetime  by  doing  much 
to  the  fame  again  :  And  there  is  a  pofthumous  book  of  Dr.  Woyfleys  cal- 

C  2  UA, 


led,  The  third  part  of  natyd  Truth,  which  hath  flrenuou  fly  handled  the 
fame  chief  matter  forScriprure  Sufficiency  againftunneceiftry  Impofitions. 
It  b^ing  fuppofed,  though  not  there  expreffcd.  I,  That  he  fpcaketh  not 
again!)  the  guiding  determination  of  undetermined  accidents  which  muft 
be  determined  one  way  or  other  :  As  Time,  Place,  Utenfils,  Tranflation- 
words,  Met  res, tunes,  &c,  2.  And  that  a  man  that  intcllerably  breakes  Gods 
Laws  f  by  Blafphemy  ,  Treafon  ,  Murder,  Fornication,  &t.)  is  not  to 
be  tolleratedbecaufe  he  erronioufly  thinks  hekeepeth  them. 

§  3.  His  fad  faying  [that  these  is  no  improbability  that  the  Jefuites  Jhould 
be  the  firfi  fetters  up  of  the  way  in  England  which  he  calls  the  Do&rinc 
[  of  Spiritual  Vrayer  J  Mr.  Lob  hath  opened,  as  it  deferveth,  in  parti 
but  to  fay  all  that  it  deferveth  would  feem  fo  harm,  that  I  have 
reafon  to    think  that  it  would  but  more  offend  than  profit  him. 

§4.  For  I  find  that  he  is  grown  too  impatient  with  our  Nameing  what 
he  patiently  and  confidently  doth:  The  caufe  of  his  impatience  I  leave 
to  himfelf.  But  that  it  is  much  within  him  I  mult  conjecture,  when  ia 
his  defence  of  Bifhop  Laud  I  read  him  faying  to  the  Papifts  [_To fpeak^ 
mildly ,  it  is  a  grofs  untruth.']  And  yet  wenlfpeak  not  fo  plainly  to  him 
f  and  I  think  never  more  (harplyj  he  accounts  it  a  continue!  Tajfion,  Rage^ 
Raiting,  Intolerable  indifcretion,  &c.  Do  I  give  .him  harder  words  than 
thefe  ?  Yet  I  profefslfmartnot  by  them:  I  take  them  for  very  tollerable 
words,  in  comparifon6f  his  mifcarriges  in  the  caufe  in  hand. 

SeveraMbrtsof  men  I  have  found  think  other  men  fpeak  in  paflion  ; 
7.  Thofe  that  hear  and  read  with  pailion;  They  think  that  which  angers 
them  came  from  anger*  2.  Thofe  that  are  too  high  to  be  dealt  with  on 
even  terms,  and  think  the  plain  fpeech  which  agreeth  to  others  is  a  con- 
tempt of  fuch  as  them.  3.  Thofe  that  commit  mifearriages  fo  grofs  and 
defend  caufes  fo  bad,  as  have  no  names  but  what  are  diigraceful,  and 
then  take  all  that  is  faid  to  anatomatize  their  caufe  and  errours,to  be  laid  a- 
gainit  them  felves.  With  thefe  and  fuch  others,  'truth,  is  not  tollerable 
he  raileth  that  confuteth  them,  and  doth  Auriculas  moths  mordaci  radere 
vero^  I  profefs  I  felt  fo  little  pailion  in  writing  that  book  which  he  faith 
was  written  in  one  continued  Pajfion,  that  I  think  verily,  I  finned  all  the 
while,  for  want  of  a  livelier  fenfeof  the  fin  and  hurt  which  I  was  detect- 
ing by  my  confutation.  Butlconfefs  it  is  my  opinion  that  Fal/hood  of 
Speech  way  lie  in  describing  a  thing  Jhort  of  Truth  ,  as  well  as  in  going  be- 
yond it:  And  that  the  Truth  of  words  is  their  Agreeablenefs  to  the  matter 
(and  mind):  And  that  verba  rebus  aptanda  funt :  And  that  he  that  writ- 
ethagainftjw  muft  call  it  fin,  and  open  the  evil  of  it. 

§  5.  His  Prefa.ce  giveth  us  hopes  that  we  are  fofarr.  agreed  in  our  ends 

as 


L'3l 

asfobe  both  for  God,  for  truth,  for  unity  and  peace  and  Love',  and  i- 
gainft  Popery,  and  one  would  think  this  much  fhould  go  far  toward;;  •  r 
Concord.     Eut,  alas,  allagieenot  what  Tiety  is,  or  what  Popery  is. 
ot  the  way  to  our  ends. 

If  he  think  that  to  be  againft  Spiritual  Prayer  would  help  us  again; . 
pery,  I.  I  would  he  would  tell  us,  which  way.  If  by  reducing  the  N 
conformists  to  think  Formes  lawful  \  fo  do  the  Jjfuites:  And  he  told  as 
that  they  at  Franchjord  took  a  Forme  from  Geneva  as  ufeful  :  And  the 
prefent  Nonconforming  put  their  judgment  out  of  queftion  an.  id<5o, 
and  i66l.  In  their  wirings,  offers  and  Formes  Printed.  But  all  that 
are  for  Formes  are  not  for  all  things  in  your  Formes, 

2.  And  I  would  he  would  have  better  told  us  what  the  Spirct^ul  Prayer 
/"/,  which  the  Jefuits  firft  brought  in  and  helpes  in  Popery,  itar  hither- 
to it  is  the  Dead  Ceremonious  formality  and  Imagery  of  Popery,  tjlefrroying 
Spirituality  >  (by  words  not  under  flood,  Mummeries,  Beads,  Canting 
Stage  workes)  which  hatha'ienat.d  mod  Religious  Protectants  tiom  them. 
I  will.  i.  Tell  you  what  I  tike  Spiritual  Pr^er  to  be  j  and  then.  2.  Defire 
his  judgment  of  it. 

1.  It  ismy  judgment  (  ifheknow  it  to  be  erroneous,  I  crave  his  rea- 
fons  J  1.  That  Maris  Soul  is  by  (info  depraved  that  it  is  morally  unable 
without  Gods  Spirit,  effectually  to  know,  feel  and  defire  deliverance  from 
his  own  fin  and  mifery,  and  to  defire  Gods  Grace  and  Glory,  above  all 
worldly  finful  pleafures. 

2.  That  therefore  fuchdetires  in  adt  and  habit  muft  be  wrought  in  us  by 
the  Spirit  of  God.   And  the  whole  work  of  Regeneration  and  Sandi- 
rication  is  a  giving  to  the  Soul  that  new  Divine  nature,  Love  and  de- 
light, which  worketh  by  fuch  holy  deiircs.     And  that  as  the  carnal  mind 
is  enmity  to  God,  and  cannnot  be  fubjedt  to  his  Law,  and  if  any  man 
have  not  the  Spirit  ofChrifr,  the  fame  is  none  of  his  i  fo  to  be  Spiritu- 
ally minded  is  life  and  peace,  and  God  who  is  a  Spirit  will  be  worihip- 
ed  in  Spirit  and  truth,  and  by  this  we  know  that  we  an:  the  Chil- 
dren of  God  by  the  Spirit  which  he  hath  giren  us  ;  For  he  promifed  to 
pour  out  the  Spirit  of  Grace  and  fupplication  :  And  becaule  \vc  are  fons  , 
he  hath  given  us  the  Spirit  of  his  Son,  by  which  we  cry  Abba   Father: 
And  this  Spirit  helpethoar  Infirmities  in  Prayer  :  If  thefe  things  be  in 
the  Papifts  Bible,  I  hope  they  are  no:  therefore  Popery.     I  fuppofe : 
piitsalfoown  our  God,  our  Saviour  and  our  Creed. 

3.  The  help  in  Prayer  which  we  expect  from  the  Spirit,  is.  1.  To 
illuminate  us  to  know  what  we  need  and  (hould  defire  and  ask.  2.  To 
kindle  in  us  holy  deiires  fincere  and  fervent,  of  what  we  fhould    a< 

C  3  Tu 


5.  To  give  us  a  true  belief  of  andtruft  in  the  Love  of  God,  the  entered1 
iion  of  Chriftand  thepiomifesof  the  Gofpel,  that  we  may  pray  in  hope. 
4.  To  give  us  thankful  hearts  for  what  we  do  receive,  and  fit  with  joy 
to  praife  the  giver.  5.  To  ftir  up  all  thefe  difpofitions  to  particular  ads 
in  the  due  feafon  :  And  to  fave  us  from  the  contrary.  <5.  And  we  believe 
that  a  mind  fo  illuminated  ,  and  affections  fo  fan&ified  and  kindled, 
kavea  great  advantage  above  others  cxteris paribus  toexprefs  themfelves 
in  words  ;  For.  1.  A  man  that  knowetb  what  to  fay  can  fpeak  it  when  the 
ignorant  cannot?  Doth  notaftock  of  knowledge  enable  you  to  Preach 
without  book  ?  2.  Such  a  Soul  will  fet  it  felf  diligently  to  think  what 
and  how  to  fpeak  in  fo  great  a  buiinefs,  when  the  carelefs  mind  it  not.  3. 
Love  and  delight  are  very  fpeedy  Learners.  4.  Fervent  defire  fets  all  the 
powers  of  the  Soul  awork,  and  is  full  and  forward  to  exprefs  it  fdf. 
Hunger  can  teach  men  eafily  to  beg :  Poor  men  fpeak  intreaties  \  Anger, 
joy ,  every  paffion  maketh  and  powreth  out  words ,  where  there  is 
prercquifite  ability. 

4.  We  believe  that  he  who  by  natural  defeclivenefs  or  difufe  cannot 
find  words  fitly  to  utter  his  own  mind,  may  have  the  help  of  Gods  Spi- 
rit in  uttering  fuch  words  as  he  readeth  or  learneth  of  others  ,  and 
fefpecially  in  the  cafe  of  Pfalms  which  arc  not  of  fudden  invention  J  \i 
for  Concord  the  Churches  agree  to  ufe  the  fame  meet  words,  Gods  Spi- 
rit may  actuate  their deliresthererin. 

5.  We  hold  that  this  Holy  Spirit,  is  asTertullian  fpeakcth,Chrilts  Vicar, 
Agent  or  Advocate*  by  preventing,  operateing,  Cooperating  grace,  thus 
to  illuminate,  Sandtirie  and  actuate  believers,  in  all  holy  works,  and  c- 
fpecially  in  prayer.  And  I  could  heartily  wifh  that  you  would  not 
be  againft  fo  much,  as  Spiritual  Preachings  Spiritual  Writing  and  difput- 
ing^  and  livings  and  not  fay  that  the  Jefuits  brought  them  in. 

6.  I  believe  that  we  are  Baptized  into  the  name  of  the  Holy  Ghoft  as 
well  as  of  the  Father  and  the  Son, believing  that  he  is  thus  Chrifts  Agent 
tor  all  this  work  upon  out  Souls,  and  covenanting  to  obey  him. 

7.  I  believe  that  iins  againft  the  Holy  Ghoft,  efpecially  deriding  or  re* 
proaching  his  great  works,  miraculous  or  Sandtiring,  have  a  dangerous 
malignity. 

8.  Ifuppofethatinall  this,  the  faculties  of  mans  own  Soul  are  the 
natural  recipients  of  the  Spirits  influx  ,  and  agent  of  the  adt  which  both 
caufes  eftedt  :  And  that  its  as  vain  a  queftion,  whether  it  be  by  the  Spirit  or 
by  natural  faculties  that  we  pray  aright,  as  whether  it  be  God  as  fens  na- 
tur£, or  mans  natural  powers  which  caufe  our  natural  adls/  Or  whether 
the  Ait  of  feeing  be  from  the  fun  or  the  eye  >  As  if  the  fame  effect 

might 


C'5  3 

might  not,  yea  muft  not  have  a  Suprior  and  Inferior  Caufe > 

p.  Therefore  as  Gods  Spirit  witnefling  with  ours  that  w:  arc  h 
drcn,  fo  Gods  Spirit  helping  our  infirmities  in  Prayer,    fufpendc 
the  exercifeof  oar  Spirits,  ovmaketh  our  reafon  and  confideration  n. ch- 
iefs, but  actuateth  them  in  their  duty.     Learning  and  r 
pray,  is  confident  with  the  Spirits  help  in  Prayer. 

ic  I  never  talkt  ot  it  with  any  No  neon  for  mi  Irs  who  denyed  that  an 
hypocrite  may  without  any  facial  help  of  the  Spirit,  (peak  all  the  {ame 
words  in  prayer  without  either  book  or  fo,m,  wich  another  may  (peak: 
The  help  of  know  ledge,  hearing,  ufe  and  pailion  may  help  him  to  words : 
Therefore  they  never  take  a  man  to  be  proved  godly  or  finceer,  by  his 
bare  words :  but  by  the  grace  of  Prayer,  which  is  holy  deftre  &c.  and 
not  by  the  fpeaking,    gift,  or  habit. 

1 1.  But  we  think  that  it  was  not  thejtfuits  that  fir  ft  fold  jut  of  the  aboun- 
dance  eftloe  heart  the  mouth  fpeakgtb  -,  and  though  the  tongue  may  lie,  it 
is  made  to  exprefsthe  mind,  and  we  muft  judge  of  other  mens  minds  by 
their  words,  tillfomwhat  elfe  difpiove  them.     And  its  natural  for  the 
Heart  to  lead  the  Tongue.     And  men  are  more  arre&ed  by  words  which 
come  from   affection  than  by   thofe  that   do  not :  and  Reading  wopds 
written  by  another  when  we  fpeak  to  God,  is  not  fo  natural  a  fignirica- 
tion  of^cfrrc  or  other  atfeCTion,  as  fpeaking  them  from  the  pre  Cent  die":; 
of  the  heart  \  For  any  Child  that  can  read  may  do  the  one,  and  it  is  r 
the  ufual  (igni  heat  ion  of  ferioufnefs  in  other  adions.     A  beggar  that 
lhould  only  read  his  begging  leflbn,  or    a  Child  or  Servant  that  (hould 
only  read  fome  words  to  his  Father  or  Mafter,  would  be  thou| 
fcnfible  of  his  wants. 

12.  Minifiers  (hould  be  men  better  aquainted  than  theptt 

fpeal^to  God  and  man:  It  is  their  office*)  and  therefore  it  belongeth  to 
them  to  choofe  the  words  which  are  fitted :  and  to  fee  op 
can  do  neither,  is  to  befriend  the  Prince  of  darknefsagainft  t1 
of  Light,  and  to  be  a  deadly  enemy  toi  rch  and  Souk. 

fet  upaminiftry  that  need  not  do  it,  but  may  choofe,  oris  not  obliged  u 
it,  is  th?  way  to  fet  up  a  miniftry  that  cannot  ds  it.     Let  the  Miniitcrsbe 
bound  to  no  more  than  to  Read,  and  a  few  years  will  transform  them  to 
(bch  as  can  do  no  more  than  read.     M      ..  proveth  that,  and  too  ma 
other  Countries. 

13.  If  it  be  praying  freely  from  prefent  knowledge  and  defire,  with- 
out a  book  or  fet  form  which  you  call  5j  cr,  eirhci 

the  ufe  ot  it  in  the  Pulpit  or  not.     If  you  are,  did  the  Jci 

you  ?  or  will  you  go  on  to  follow  then:  ?  If  n  r  arty 


[16] 

ate  the  Conformifrs,  while  fomany  ufe  it  and  pray  fpiritually  ?  And  what 
a  Cafe  is  the  Church  of  England  in,  that  hath  ftill  fo  many  Minifters  that 
pray  as  the  Jefuits  Difciples  ?  Or  why  do  you  fo  reproach  your  Church 
and  Miniftry  ? 

'14.  Do  you  think  that  there  is  more  force  in  the  name  of  a  Jefuit  to 
difgrace  Spiritual  prayer,  or  in  the  name  of  Spiritual  prayer  to  honour  the 
Jefuits  }  And  do  you  not  feem  to  prevaricate  and  highly  honour  the  Je- 
fuits, on  pretence  of  dishonoring  Spiritual  prayer?  If  you  had  faid  that 
the  Jefuits  firft  brought  in  Spiritual  preaching,  and  difcourfe  and  Spiritu- 
al living,  would  it  not  have  more  honoured  them,  than  dishonoured  Spi- 
rituality? Will  freedom  from  Spiritual  -prayer  honour  your  Church  ?  as 
Seneca  thought  Cato\  name  would  do  more  to  honour  Drunkenncfs,  than 
Drunkennefs  could  do  to  dimonour  Cato  ? 

lam  not  fuch  an  Antipapift,  as  to  fall  out  with  Father  Son  or 
Holy-Ghoft,  becaufe  the  Jefuits  own  them.  You  do  but  help  to  con- 
firm my  charity,  wno  have  long  thought  that  among  the  Papi/ls,  there 
are  many  perfons  truly  godly,  though  their  education,  converfe,  and 
proud,  tyrannical  wordly  Clergy,  have  fadly  vitiated  them. 

15.  All  prayers  written  or  unwritten  are  made  byfomebody.  Thole 
that  the^B.fhops  writedown  for  us  in  the  Liturgy,  and  for  our  Fails,  were 
made  by  their  invention  :  Either  they  had  the  help  of  the  Spirit  in  mak- 
ing them  or  not :  If  yea,  then  why  is  it  not  as  Jefuitical  to  write  a  Spirit 
tual  prayer,  as  to  fpeak  one  ?  If  not,  excufe  them  that  fay  Gods  Spirit 
made  not  your  Liturgy,  nor  are  they  Spiritual  prayers. 

\6.  And  were  it  not  too  like  high  and  dangerous  Pride,  if  fuch  a  one 
as  Bifhop  Bancroft,  Biihop  Laud,  £i(hop  Morley,  Biihop  Gunning,  in  a 
Convocation,  or  before  every  publick  Fair,  fhould  be  appointed  to  write 
the  words  of  Prayer,  and  (hould  in  effed  fay  to  all  the  moft  Learned  Di- 
vines in  England  [  The  Spirit  caufed  us  to  write  thefe  prayers,  and  our 
mtafure  is  fo  fure  ^nd  great,  that  none  of  you  miy  pre  fume  to  qucfiion  it,  nor 
to  thin\that  you  can  pray  Spiritually  in  any  words  of  your  own,  hut  only  in 
ours,  at  leaji  in  the  Affemby.  The  Spirit  will  help  you  if  you  fay  our  words, 
but  not  your  own.  It  now  cometh  into  my  mind  what  may  be  foine  of 
the  meaning  of  Biihop  Gunnings  Chaplain,  Doclor  Saywell,  in  his  lait 
Book,  that  none  hath  power  to  ordain  Bifhops,  hut  they  that  have  power  to 
give  the  Holy  Ghpfi  fir  the  roor\  of  their  Office.  It  may  be  it  is,  -The Holy 
Ghott  to  write  Doclrine  Sermons  and  Prayers  for  all  their  Clergy  to  ufe. 
But  do  you  not  fay  alfo  to  the  Presbyters  Kecche  the  Holy  Gboft  ?  Ifthey  have 
him,  why  cannot  they  fpeak  their  own  hearts  in  other  words  than  yours  ? 
js Spiritual  prayer  appropriated  to  your  Liturgy,  words  or  forms,  any  more 

than 


[17] 
than  at  the  Councfrat  Trent  he  was  to  the  Popes  inftrudions. 

17.  We  all  confefs,  that  as  all  the  adions  of  imperfed  men,  have 
their  imperfections,  fo  have  all  our  prayers,  and  thefe  arecaiily  aggra- 
vated :  Sudden  free  prayer,  and  book  prayer,  have  both  their  conveni- 
encies  and  inconveniencies:  The  queltion  is  which  bic  &  nunc  hath  the  great- 
eft,  and  whether  forbidding  either  be  not  worft  of  all:  I  have  named 
the  conveniencies  and  inconveniencies  of  each  in  my  Chriitian  Dire- 
dory. 

18.  Experience  telleth  the  world  ,  that  the  daily  faying  over  only 
the  fame  words,  and  that  read  out  of  a  paper  impofed  by  others,  by  one 
that  no  further  fheweth  any  fenfe  of  what  he  doth,  is  rot  fo  apt  as 
more  free  and  well  varied  words  in  feafon,  to  keep  people  from  fleepy 
fenftlefs  prophanation  ,  and  praying  as  the  Papifts  do  with  their  Maf- 
fes,  Rofaries,  and  Beads  :  And  the  variety  of  Subjects  preached  on,  and 
variety  of  occafions ,  and  all  accidents  require  fome  diverfirication  of 
words  and  methods. 

19.  It  is  a  work  of  reverence  to  (peak  to  the  King  >  yet  as  it  is  law- 
ful to  write  a  Petition  to  him ,  fo  to  fpeak  to  him  without  Book- 
Judges  have  ieiious  work  to  do,  for  eftate  and  life,  and  yet  they  are 
trufted  to  fpeak  without  prefcribed  words*,  and  ioare  Advocates,  Law- 
yers, Ambaltadors,  Phyficians,  Philofophers,  and  all  men  in  their  Profcf- 
fions,  except  Minifters  and  Chriftians,  as  fuch. 

20.  We  know  not  why  men  may  not  be  intruded  to  fpeak  to  God  in 
the  name  of  imperfed  man  without  impofed  books  and  words,  as  well 
as  to  fpeak  to  man  from  the  mod  perfed  God  and  in  his  name  i  in 
preaching.  Mans  adions  will  be  like  man .  Nothing  that  is  not  divine 
and  fpiritual  mould  be  fpoken  as  from  God  and  in  his  name.  And  as 
after  our  fruftrated  Treaty  for  Concord  1661.  one  of  them  fnamelefsj 
wrote  a  Book  againfi  free  praying  without  an  impofed  form  in  the  Pulpit, 
and  yet  they  never  durft  forbid  it  to  this  day i  fo  I  know  who  (hewed 
his  defireof  a  new  Book  of  Homilies  (of  his  own  making  its  like  )  to 
have  been  impofed  inftead  of  preaching,  and  of  the  old  ones,  on  thofe 
that  had  not  fpecial  licenfeto  preach.  But  intercft  ruleth  the  world: 
They  durft  not  fo  far  difgrace  their  Clergy,  as  to  make  them  meer  Rea* 
ders,  nor  lofcthe  advantage  of  talking  out  of  the  Pulpit  for  their  Caufe, 
where  none  muft  contradid  them. 

Mr.  Lob  hath  ask'd  you  already,  whether  our  Spiritual  Fraycr,  as  you 
call  it,  or  your  Liturgy  ( and  Bifhop  Cnw(//?x,and  Dr  Taylors  Prayer-books, 
&c.)  beliker  to  the  PopifhMafs  book,  and  many  other  Offices  and  De- 
votions? Indeed   Mr.  dujiinshzth  fo  muchgiavity,  as  execptinghisex- 

D  a  n  '    . 


[18] 

etirfions  to  Saints,  &c.    it  may- compare  with  many  of  yours. 

And  for  that  fort  of  fpiritual  Devotion  ,  in  which  they  flie  too  high, 
I  have  found  more  of  it  in  the  Friers,  Francikans,  Benedidlines,  &c.  fuch 
as  Birbanjon,  Benedittus  de  Benedict is,  &c.  than  in  the  Jcfuits  :  And  the 
Otatonanr^PbiLNeriusfiaronius,  and  the  red-,  and  of  their  fober  orReligious 
men,  as  Sales,  Mr.  Renti,&jc.  and  of  oldt  JobnGerfon  ,  Kempis,  &c.  have 
more  of  fpirituality  than  the  Jefuits.  But  enough  of  thiF. 

§  6.  As  to  the  reft  of  his  Prefatory  difcourle  of  the  Advantages  of 
Popery,  i.  We  doubt  not  but  the  Papifls  play  their  game  among  all 
Parties,  as  far  as  they  are  able,  and  put  on  divers  forts  of  Vizors.  But 
doth  he  ("that  is  a  HiflorianJ  not  know,  that  all  over  the  world  their 
cheif  dclign  is  upon  the  Rulers  and  Leaders,  and  they  Cry,  Fight  neither 
againft  gnat  or  [mall,  but  to  win  one  Court  Card  iignirieth  more  than  ma- 
ny others  ? 

2.  Doth  he  think  the  Papifts  take  the  .Conforming  or  the  Nonconfor- 
miits  to  be  nearer  to  them,  and  kfs  againfl  them  ? 

3.  Did  the  Papifts  think  Bilhop  Lauds  reconciling  defign  deicribed  by 
Doctor  Heylin,  ("entertained  by  Santla  Clara  ,  Leander ,  &c. )  or  the 
Parliaments  fears  of  his  introducing  Popery  in  thole  times,  to  be  more  a- 
gainftthem.? 

4.  Are  they  liker  to  help  in  Popery,  that  are  foapt  to  be  over-averfe 
to  any  thing  that  favours  of  it,  in  Doclrine,  Difcipline,  and  Worfhip , 
and  account  the  Pope  Antichrift  >  Or  they  that  hold  as  followeth.  1.  (As 
Grothis)  Thar  a  Pafiji  is  hut  one  that  flatters  the  Popes,  as  if  all  were  juftthat 
they  Jay  and  do  (  and  fo  there  are  few  Papilts  I  hope  in  the  World.) 
2.  That  the  Church  of  Rome  is  found  in  Faith.  3.  And  io  are.  all  the  Gene- 
ral  Councils  y  even  Trent,  4.  That  Rome  is  the  Miftrefs  of  all  Churches  ;  or  as 
Bimop  Bromhal,  that  for  Concord  we  mud  all  obey  the  Pope,  as  Patriarch  of 
the  Weft,  and  ^rincipium  llnitatis  Catholics  ,  ruling  according  to  the  old 
Canons,  (  a  Foreign  JurifdiclionJ  and  all  thofe  pafs  for  Schifmaticks,  that 
refufe  it  (of  which  more  after. J  5.  That  the  validity  of  our  Miniftry 
muft  be  proved  by  the  derivation  of  it  from  the  uninterrupted  fuccellion 
of  the  Roman  Ordainers  and  Church.  6.  That  the  Church  of  Rome  by 
thatfixccilion  is  a  true,  though  faulty  Church  of  Chrift,  but  fo  are  none 
of  the  Reformed  Churches  which  have  not  Bifhops,  or  have  them  not  by 
fuch  uninterrupted  fuccellion.  7.  That  the  only  way  of  the  Concord  of 
Churches  and  all  Chrijiians  is  (  faith  Bifhop  Gunning)  to  obey  the  governing 
part  of  the  Church  Vniverfal,  is  which  Collegium  Paftorum,  all  the  Bijhops  of 
the  univtrfal  Church,  in  one  Regent  Colledge,  governing  all  the  Chriftian  World 
pzrlheras  fortmtas.     8.   That  its  fafer  and  better  for  the  Proteftants  in 

France 


Ci9] 

Trance  to  be  of  the  Trench  Church  of  Papifts  than  to  continue  withoti 
Bilhops  as  they  are.  9.That  we  fhould  come  as  near  the  Papifis  as  thcGreek 
Church  doth,  or  as  both  Greek  and  Latin  did  at  the  rupture  of  the  two 
Churches,  or  as  in  Greg.  id.  daies  fay  others,  or  as  in  Char.  Mag*  daies, 
lay  others  i  receiving  fay  fome  the  rirft  fix  General  Councils,  fay  others 
thehrft  8.  10.  That  we  muft  amend  the  Oath  of  Supremacy  for  the 
Papifts,  as  Thomdick^ faith  ,  and  fo«many  Doctrines  as  he  intimateth- 
ii.  That  its  defireable  that  the  Papifts  bad  continued  in  our  Churches 
as  in  the  begining  of  Queen  Eliz.  And  if  they  come  fas  Church  Papifts 
do)  mould  be  received  in  our  Communion.  12.  That  if  the  Pope  have 
not  fas  fome  hold)  aright  of  fuch  Primacy  as  belongs  to  Saint  Peters 
fuccefTour,  atleaft,  His  Primacy  is  a  very  prudent  humane  conftkution. 
1.  That  there  may  be  a  Common  Father  to  care  for  all  the  Church.  2. 
And  one  to  be  a  Head  of  Unity  and  order.  3.  And  one  to  call  General 
Councils.  4.  And  one  to  rule  between  when  there  are  no  fuch  Councils 
(which  are  rare).  5.  And  one  to  give  power  to  Patriarchs  and  Arch~ 
Bifhops  who  elfe  will  have  none  over  them  to  authorize,  or  Govern  them. 
6.  And  one  to  decide  controverlles,  when  Countries,  Churches  and  Arch- 
Biftiops  difagree.  7.  And  one  to  fend  out  Preachers  among  Heathens , 
Infidels  and  Hereticks,  all  over  the  world.  8.  And  one  boldly  to  reprove, 
admonifhand,  if  need  be,  excommunicate  Kings,  which  their  own  fub- 
jedfo  dare  not  do. 

I  do  not  mean  that  all  thefe  things  or  any  of  them  are  the  Do&rine  of 
the  Church  oiEngland^  or  held  by  all  or  moft  that  conforme.  But  if  fome 
of  it  have  been  publifhed  by  the  Chief  Prelates,  and  fome  by  their  chief 
defenders,  and  fome  in  conference  with  us  by  Clergy  men,  I  only  ask 
whether  all  this  pleafe  not  and  advantage  not  the  Papifts  ,  more  than 
Nonconforming  any  way  do?  And  whether  Arch  Bifhop  Vfktr  and  his 
SuccefTor  Arch-Bifhop  Bromhal^  Bifhop  Downam  and  his  Succeflbur  Bifhop 
Taylor  differed  not  as  much  as  you  and  I  do  ?  And  whether  the  multitude  of 
Parifli  Prieft  that  were  Papifts  in  Queen  Elizabeths  daies ,  and  Eiftiop 
Godfrey  Goodman  a  Papifts  Bifhop  of  Gloncefter,  with  all  the  reft  mention- 
ed by  Prin,  Rujhrvorthj  Burnet ,  &c.  tell  us  not  that  the  Papifts  had  a  hope- 
ful game  to  play  among  the  Bifhops  and  Clergy  of  the  Church  ? 

§7.  As  to  his  note  out  of  Mr.  Jo*  Humpherics  book,  difclaiming  Cru- 
elty to  Papifts,  its  known  Mr.  Humphery  is  a  man  of  latitude  and  univcrfal 
Charity,  and  tyeth  himfelf  to  no  party  or  any  mens  opinions  :  He  openly 
profeiTeth  his  hope  of  the  Salvation  of  many  Heathens,  and  I  fo  little  fear 
the  noife  of  the  cenforious,  that  even  now  while  the  Plot  doth  render  them 
moft  odious, I  freely  fay.  1.  That  I  would  have  Papifts  ufed  like  men,  and 

D  2  ro 


/>3 

no  worfe  than  our  own  defence  requireth  :  2,  That  I  would  have  no  man 
pat  to  death  for  beingaPrieft  :  3.  That  I  would  haveno  writ  de  excom- 
municato capiendo,  or  any  Law  compel  them  to  our  Communion  and  Sa- 
craments. For  I  would  cot  give  it  them  ( if  I  knew  them  J  if  they 
came. 

§8.  As  to  his  Accufationofmy  hxii  Flea  for  Fe ace,  he  hath  it  after,  ard 
it  is  alter  anfwered.  And  asto  his^Accufation  of  my  book  for  Concord,  1 
anfwer.  i.  Is  it  no  Miniiterswork,  in  a  contending  world ,  to  tdl  and 
prove  what  are  Chriits  ordained  termes  of  Chriftian  Concord ,  but  his 
that  ;s  [_Chrifis  plenipotentiary  on  Earth,  and  were  to  fet  the  termes  of  Peace  and 
War]  Is  this  fpoken  like  a  peace  maker  and  a  Divine  ?  Doth  not  he  pre- 
tend alfo  in  his  way  to  declare  the  terms  of  Concord  ? 

2.  Eut  no  rmn  more  heartily  agreeth  with  him  in  lamenting  the 
Hate  of  the  Church  on  earth,  that  when  fuch  men  as  Bifhop  Gunning, 
Dean  Stillingfleet ,  Dr.  Sayrvel,  &c.  on  one  fide,  and  fuch  as  I  and  many 
better  men  on  the  other  fide,  have  fo  many  years  ftudied  hard  to  know 
Gods  will,  I  am  certain  for  my  felf,  and  I  hope  it  of  them,  with  an  un^ 
feigned  defire  to  find  out  the  truth  what  ever  it  coft,  fand  I  profefs  as 
going  to  God,  that  would  he  but  make  me  know  that  Popery,  illencing 
Prelacy,  imprifoning,  Banifhing  ,  or  ruining  all  Nonconformists,  Ana- 
baptitfs,  Antinomians,  Quakers,  or  any  that  ever  I  wrote  againft,  are 
in  the  right  ,  I  would  with  greater  joy  and  thankfulnefs  recant  and 
turne  to  them,  than  I  would  receive  the  greatefr  preferment  in  the  land) 
I  fay,  that  yet  after  all  this  we  (hquld  fo  far  differ,  as  for  one  fide  to  be 
confident  that  the  others  way  of  Concord  is  the  ready  way  to  ruin 
wickednefs  and  confufion,  and  to  come  to  that  boldnelsto  proclaim  this 
to  the  world,  alas  how  doleful  a  cafe  is  this  ? 

What  hope  of  Chrillian  peace  and  concord  when  fuch  excellent  fober 
well  itudyed  men  as  they,  quite  above  the  common  fort,  not  byaiTed  hy 
honour,  or  preferments  or  power,  by  Bifhopricks,  Deaneries,  Maftcrftiips, 
plurality,  or  love  of  any  worldly  wealth,  and  fuch  as  we  thatftudy  and 
pray  as  hard  as  they  to  know  the  truth,  are  yet  confident  to  the  height 
that  each  "others  termes  of  Love  and  peace,  axe  but  Sathans  way  to 
to  defiroy  them  both,  and  introduce  (as  Dr.  Sayrvel  faith  Conventicles 
do)  Hcrefie,  Popery,  Ignorance,  Prophanenefs  and  Confufion:  And 
what  we  arepaft  doubt  that  their  way  will  do,  experience  faith  more  than 
we  may  do. 

Oh  what  (hall  the  poor  people  do  info  great  a  temptation  ! 

§p.  But  I  muft  pafs  from  his  preface  ,  where  I  have  noted,  1.  That 
he  is  yet  Co  peaceable  as  to  propofe  fbme  fort  of  abatements  for  our  Coa- 

cord  x 


[21} 

cord  >  that  the  benifit  maybe  fibi  &  fuis,  not  reaching  our  necefliri 
hi.it  much  better  than  nothing. 

2.  That  they  arc  (o  ill  agreed,  that  Bifhop  Gw?/;z/2gx  Chaplain  wr 
againftit,  making  the  only  way  of  Peace  to  be  by  the  fvvord  to  torce  all 
men  to  full  obedience  to  their  Lordfhips  in  every  thing  injoyned,  nor  i- 
batingan  Oath,  a  Subfcription,  a  Covenant,  a  Word,  a  Ceremony,  with- 
out Comprehenfion  or  limited  Toleration. 

3  And  I  could  vvifh  the  Doctor  would  confent,  atleaftthat  Lords  an4 
Pailiamentmen  may  have  the  liberty  themfclves  of  educating  their  own 
Sons,  To  it  be  in  the  Chriitian  Reformed  Religion,  and  to  choofe  their 
Tutors,  and  not  confine  them  to  Conformifts  only  :  The  Papiftsare  tol- 
lerated  in  choofing  Tutors  for  their  Children  :  The  King  of  France  hath 
not  yet  taken  away  this  liberty  from  the  Proteftants  :  Nor  the  Turks 
from  the  Greeks:  And  muftyou  needs  take  it  away  from  all  rhe  Lords  , 
Knights,  Gentlemen ,  Citizens  ,  and  Free-holders  of  England.  Perhaps 
Beggars  will  confent,  ifvouwill  keep  their  Children,  or  do  what  the 
Godfathers  vow.  Moft  Gentlemen,  that  keep  Chaplains ,  expect  that 
they  teach  their  Sons  at  home,  fometime  at  lea  ft  i  what  if  a  Lord  or 
Knight  havefuch  a  Chaplain  as  Hngh  Brougbton,  or  Ainfnrortb,  oxzsAtn:- 
JihSj  Blondel,  Salmatius,  as  Gatahgr,  Vines,  Surges,  &c.  muft  the  Law  for- 
bid them  to  read  Hebrew,  Philofophy,  or  Divinity  to  their  Sons  ?  I  doubt 
you  will  fcarce  get  the  Parliament  hereafter  to  make  fucha  Law  to  fetter 
themfelves,  left  next  you  would  extend  \our  dominion  alfo  to  their 
Wives  as  well  as  Sons  ,  and  forbid,  them  marrying  any  but  Confor- 
mifts. 

Is  it  not  enough  to  turn  us  all  out  of  the  publick  Miniftry  i  Methinks 
you  might  allow  fome  the  Office  of  a  School-matter,  orHoufhold  Tutor. 
or  Chaplain  under  the  Laws  of  Peace  •>  unlefsthe  Sword  be  all  that  you 
tiufttoo:  If  it  be,  it  is  an  uncertain  thing:  The  minds  of  Princes  are 
changable,  and  all  things  in  this  World  are  on  the  Wheel ;  when  Peter 
fliethtothe  Sword,  Chrift  bids  him  put  it  up,  for  they  thatfo  ule*  it 
perHh  by  it :  Hurting  many,  force th  many  to  hurt  you,  or  to  defire  their 
own  deliverance,  though  by  your  hurt. 


CHAP. 


[«] 


CHAP.  III. 

The  leghnnng  of  the  DoBors  m/reajonable  Accusations  examined : 
His  fiatnig  of  the  Cafe  of  Separation. 

§  i.  >TpHis  much  inftead  of  an  intelligible  dating  of  our  Contro- 
JL  verfie  he  giveth  us,  Page  2.  [_By  feparation  we  mean  nothing 
elfe,  but  withdrawing  from  the  conftant  Communion  of  our  Church  ,  and 
joyning  with  Separate  Congregations,  for  greater  purity  of  worflrip,  and  bet* 
ter  means  of  Edification.  ~]  And  may  we.be  fare  by  this,  that  we  under- 
hand the  difference. 

i.  Whether  by  [  Our  Church ~\  he  meant  the  Parochial  Church,  ( and  if 
fo,  whether  fome  or  all  )  or  the  Dioccfan   Church  i  or  the  Provincial,  or 
the  National,  or  all  I  know  not.     But  1  know  well,  that  fbme  withdraw 
frcm  fome  Parifh  Churches  which  joynwith  others.     And  fbme  think 
they  withdraw  not  from  the  Diocefan  or  Provincial ,    if  they  communi- 
cate with  any  one  Parifh  Church  in  the  Diocefs :  And  fome  renounce 
the  Diocefan  Church  ,  which  confiantly  joyn  with  the  Parochial  :  And 
for  the  National  Church,  who  can  tell  whether  we  have   Communion 
with  it,  till  we  know  what  they  mean  by  it  ?.  Indeed  in  the  latter  part, 
(after  the  long  difpute)  he  condefcendcth beyond  expectation  to  explain 
that  term  i  But  its  fo  as  plainly  to  deny  that  there  is  any  fuch  thing  as  a 
Church  of  England  in  a  Political  fenfe,  that  hath  any  conftitutive  Regent 
part:  But  even  there  fo  late  he  maketh  it  not  polfible  to  us  to  know, 
whether  we  be  members  of  the  Church  or  not  :  For  he  maketh  it  to  be 
but  all  the  Chriftians  and  Churches  in  the  Kingdom  joyned  by  confent 
expreft  by  their  Reprefentatives  in  Parliament,  under  the  fame  civil  Go- 
vernment and  Rules  of  Religion  (  Doctrine,  and  Worfhip,  and  Govern- 
ment )     i.  As  it  is  a  Chriftian  Kingdom^  we  are  fure,  that  we  are  mem- 
bers of  k.     2.  As  it  is  all  the  Churches  of  the  Kingdom  confenting  to 
the  Scriptures,  yea,  and  to  Articles  of  Doctrine,  and  all  that  Chri/t  or 
his  Apoltles  taught,  we  are  fure  that  we  withdraw  not  from  it:  3.  But, 
if  every  Chancellor,  Dean,  Commiffary,  Surrogate,^.  Or  every  forme 
or  word  or  Cercmonie  beeffential  to  their  Church,  we  cannot  tell  who 
is  of  it  and  who  not  ?  Or  really  whether  any  reject  not. fome  one  forme, 
word  or  office  >  If  every  fuch  thing  be  not  ellential,  he  never  in  all  the 
book  tels  us  vvhar  is,  or  how  to  know  it,  or  who  is  of  it. 

§  3.  And 


[*3l 

$2,  And  the  word  [  with  driving  ]  feemeth  to  imply   former  C 
fnunion  :  And  if  ib,  he  maketh  all  the  Anabaptifts,  Independants,  Viziby* 
terians,  &c.  Who  never  were  of  their  Church,  to  be  none  of  the  Sepir* 
atiiishere  meant. 

But  if  by  [withdrawing]  he  mean  [  not  joyning  in  Communion]  either 
he  meaneth  in  the  whole  Communion  or  but  in  part :  If  the  whole,  then  the 
many  thoufands  that  live  in  the  Parifhes  and  Communicate  not  in  the 
Sacrament  are  no  members  of  the  Parirti  Church.  And  who  knoweth 
then  who  are  of  their  Church?  And  how  few  in  many  Parifhes  are  of 
it,  that  yet  pafs  for  Members  of  the  Church  of  England  ?  And  yet  I 
thaPjoyn  with  them  am  none  of  it,  in  their  account. 

And.  J..  What  meaneth  he  by  [Conjlant  Communion]  I  go  totheParifk 
Church  when  iicknefs  hindreth  not,  once  a  day  ••>  I  go  to  the  Sacrament, 
and  am  none  of  their  Church.  Thoulands  go  but  rarely,  and  thoufands 
fcarceat  all,  at  lead  to  the  Sacrament,  and  thefeareof  their  Church  and 
no  (eparatiits. 

4.  But  perhaps  the  conjunction  is  explicative  \_and  \oyn  with  feparate 
Congregations  for  greater  purity,  and  Edification  :  If  fo,  then  he  that  never 
joyneth  with  them  nor  any  other  is  none  of  the  intended  feparati/ts. 
2.  Nor  he  that  goeth  to  other  Churches  on  other  account;  than  for  furh 
ty  of  Worship  and  Edification  (As  Papiiis  that  go  as  to  the  only  true  Church 
for  the  Authority  J. 

§3.  But  the  utter  ambiguity  is  in  the  word  feparate  y  And  that  you 
may  underftand  it  he  explaineth  it  by  repeating  it.  Ey  feparation  he  means 
withdrawingto  feparatc  Congregations.  But  the  doubt  isy  which  art  the  fe- 
parate  Congregations.  I  named  many  forts  of  Lawful  and  unlawful  fe- 
paration* ,  but  he  will  not  tell  us  which  he  meaneth  by  any  intreaty . 

§.  4.  I  would  my  felf  yet  that  I  may  be  underftood,  tell  the  reader  what 
forts  of  feparation  1  renounce  and  what.  I  own  :  But  I  have  done  it  fooft 
and  largely,  that  lam  afhamed  to  repeat  it,  as  oft  as  mens  confution  calls 
me  to  it.  The  reader  who  thinks  it  worth  his  labour,  may  fee  it  done  ir> 
my  rirft  ?lea  for  Feace,  and  in  the  Preface  to  my  Cath.  Theol.  and  fpecial- 
ly  in  the  beginning  of  the  third  Part  of  my  Treat,  of  Concord  jind  in  Cbrifi. 
~DinB.    And  he  calls  me  here  afterward  to  the  fame 

Certainly  it  is  only  finful  feparation  that  is  in  the  queftiom  and  as  cer- 
tainly there  are  many  forts  not  finful.  I  am  locally  feparate  from  all 
Churches  fave  that  where  I  am.  I  morally  feparate  from  the  RomanChurch 
as  an  unlawful  Policy,  and  all  other  which  are  injpecie  again/t  Gods  word  : 
I  feparate  from  (ome  for  Herehe  as  being  not  capable  matter  of  a  Church, 
while  they  own  not  all  the  Effence  ofChriftianity*     I  feparate  from  fome 

as 


[24] 
as  impofing  fin,  and  refufing  my  Communion  without  it.    I  feparate  from 
Ibme  as  having  no  lawful  Payors  *,  fome  being  uncapable  matter,  and  feme, 
being  ufurpers  that  have  no  true  call:  I  feparate  from  fome  only  fo  far 
as  to    prefer  a  better  rebus  fie  ft antibus  \     fometime  a  better  as   to  the 
Doctrine,   fometime  as  to  the  Worfhip,   fometime  as  to  the  Difcipline 
iometime  and  moftly  as  to  the  Pallors  worth  and  work  >   fome  go  from 
their  own  Parilh,  becaufe  the  Minifter  is  very  ignorant  in  comparifon  of 
another  towhom  they  go:  lomethathear  the  Minifter  preach  againftpre- 
cifenefs  and  for  Ceremonies,  had  rather  hear  another  that  callcth  them  to 
holinefs:  fome  that  have  tollerable  Preachers  go  to  Doctor    Stillingfteet 
and  Doctor  Tillotfonzs  better:  fome  go  for  neernefs  to  another  Church. 
Some  go  from  their  own  Parilh  becaufe  the  Minifter  cuts  the  Common- 
prayer  too  fhort,  and  Preacheth  too  longs  fome  becaufe  they  would  have 
it  fo,  go  to  fuch  :  fome  becaufe  the  Parfon  is  an  Arminian  \  others  becaufe 
he  is  contrary.     Some  go  to  the  Minifterthat  isftrictin  keeping  the  fcan- 
dalous  from  the  Sacrament :  fome  therefore  go  from  him:  lbme  remove 
their  Dwellings  or  Lodgings  for  thefe  ends  >  and  fome  do  not :  fome  go 
from  their  ownParifh  for  the  benefit  of  the  Organs  in  another.    And  of 
old,  when  Nonconforming  had  Parifh  Churches  and  ufed  fome  part  of  the 
Liturgy,  many  went  to  them  from  their  ownParifhes.     Some  of  thefe  are 
lawful,  fome  are  unlawful:  Moft  certainly  they  that  go  from  their  own 
Parishes,  yea,  or  to  Nonconforming  AiTemblies,   in  London,  go  not  all  on 
the  fame  account:  Nor  doth  the  Doctor  and  fuch  other  feparate  from  me 
as  I  am  faid  to  do  from  them,  but  otherwife  and  much  more. 

§.5.  If  he  would  firft  have  told  us  what  Separation  isfinful  >  fecondly,and 
then  have  proved  us  guilty  of  it,  in/kadofthe  confufed  talk  ofSeparation, 
and  a  begging  the  queftion  by  fupofing  that  to  be  finful,  which  he  will 
neither  difcribe,  nor  prove  fuch<  it  had  been  of  fome  ufefulnefs  to  our 
conviction.  But  I  confefs  I  never  liked  thofe  Phyfitians  who  give  their 
Patients  the  Medicines  that  they  are  beft  ftored  with,  or  they  can  beft  fpare, 
be  the  difeafe  whatfoevcr  h  Nor  thedifputer  that  poureth  out  what  he  is 
belt  furniQied  to  fay,  how  ufelefs  foever  to  the  reader  or  to  the  Caufe.  Di£- 
puteing  mould  not  be  like  boys  playing  at  Dufl  pointy  who  cover  their 
Points  in  a  great  heap  of  Duft,  and  then  throw  Stones  or  Cudgels  at  it, 
and  he  that  firft  uncovereth  them  wins  them.  Dully  heaps  of  ambigu- 
ous words  confufedly  poured  out,  befriend  not  Truth  that  mould  be  Na- 
ked^nor  the  reader. 

§.  6.  Some  thought  it  was  the  Place  called  Conventicle  boufes,  which 
made  the  Conforming  callus  Sepjratijh j  and  they  got  oft  into  Parifh 
Churcbesand  Chappells-   But  thefe  were  made  the  worft  of  fepatatifts , 

and 


[25] 
and  punifhed  the  more.     And  doubletfs  it  is  not  meeting  at  any  of  the 
new  Tabernacles,  nor  at  the  Spittle,  nor  atSturbridgz  Fair,  where  Preach- 
ing hath  long     been  ufed,  nor  in  a  Prifbn    nor  at  the  Gallows  toPrif- 
oners  and  People,  which  are  faulty  Separation. 

§.  7.  Some  thought  that  they  meant  that  its  want  of  the  Common- 
prayer  that  makethus  Separators >  and  they  have  tryedand  read  the  Com- 
mon-prater in  their  AfTemblys :  But  thefe  have  been  accufed  and  (un^ad 
the  more.  And  even  Mr.  Cbeny  was  forced  to  fly  his  Country  for  read- 
ing it,  and  Preaching  in  an  unl'c.nfed  meeting.  And  fome  reading 
more  and  fome  lefs,  by  this  it  will  not  be  known  who  are  the  Separa- 
ting i  The  old  Nonconforming  in  their  Parifh  Churches  read  fome  more, 
fome  lefs,  and  now  fome  Conformifts  vary.  They  fay  a  Conformif:  at 
Greenwich  keepeth  up  a  Common-prayer  Conventicle  i  (ome  Conformilts 
are  accufed  for  overpaying  much  :  One  lately  fufpended  for  wearing  the 
Surplice  too  feldom,  and  refuting  to  pray  for  \_our  gratious  §ueen  and 
James  T)uk$  of  York.  ]  How  much  of  this  goeth  to  make  a  Separatift  I 

§.  8.  Some  thought  it  was  want  of  the  Magifrratcs  leave  that  made 
them  callus  feparatifts:  Eut  when  the  King  Licenled  us,  the  accufation 
was  the  fame:  yea  Mr.  Hinkley  and  many  others  tell  you,  that  they  took 
this  for  worftof  all. 

$.9.  Some  fay  it  is  want  of  theBifhops  Licence:  But  as  Mr.  Tbo.G 
hath  his  Univerfity  Licence,   and  I  have  Bilhop  Sheldon  s  Licence  ( I  think- 
not  invalidate  ) and  yet  this  goeth  for  no  juftiheation  of  us  ■->  [0  is  it  with 
others. 

§.  10.  Some  think  that  it  is  a  Conventicle  as  defcribed  by  their  Can- 
non that  mull  make  us  Separating,  which  is  of  men  that  call  tbemfilveibl 
another  Clmrcb.  Eut  that's  not  it :  Mr.  Gouge,  Mr.  Toole,  Mr.  Humphrey, 
and  my  felf,  and  abundance  more  that  never  gathered  any  Church,  nor 
called  our  felves  of  any  other  then  their  own,  are  neverthclefs  feparatifts 
in  thefe  mens  account. 

§.  11  .They  that  remembred  what  was  called  Separation  in  Englandof 
old,  fuppofed  it  had  thefe  two  degrees,  which  mide  men  called  Brown ifts. 
Frft  fallly  taking  the  Parifb  Minifters  and  Churches  for  no  true  Miniitcrs 
and  Churches  of  Chrifr,  and  therefore  not  to  be  Communicated  with.  Se^ 
condly  or  fin  the  lower  rank  ytalily  taking  the  faults  of  the  Parilh  Mi- 
nifters and  Churches  to  be  fo  great,  that  its  a  (in  to  have  ordinary  Commu- 
nion with  them.  But  they  that  have  f;ill  difclaimed  both  thefe  arc  Separa- 
tes Jhll  in  our  Accufers  fence. 

§.12.  Some  thought  that  ordinary  Commitnkating  in  the  Parifh  Churches 
and  pleading  for  it,  would  prove  us  no  feparatilts  with  them.     Eut  this 

E  wiH 


[2<n 

will  not  fervc  as  my  own  and  many  other  mens  Experience  proveth. 

§.13-  I  am  called  after  to  fay  more  of  this:  The  (urn  of  my  teparation 
is  this.  Fir/t  that  I  take  not  the  Parifh  Churches  to  be  the  only  Churches 
that  I  mud  Communicate  with,  and  will  not  confine  my  Communion  to 
themalone,  as  if  they  were  a  feci:,  or  All :  But  will  alfo  have  Communion 
with  "Dutch,  French  or  Nonconforming. 

2.  I  take  not  the  Order,  Difcipline  and  mode  of  worfhip  in  the  Parifh 
Churches,  nor  the  Preaching  of  very  many  Parfons,  Vicars  and  Curates, 
to  be  the  beft  and  mod  deferable.  » 

3.  I  take  thofe  to  be  no  true  Political  Churches,  which  have  no  Pay- 
ors that  have  all  the  Qualifications,  and  Call,  and  Authority,  which  is 
EiTential  to  the  Office  >  and  therefore  can  communicate  with  them,  but 
as  with  a  flock  without  a  Paftor,  or  an  Oratory,  Community  or  Catechi- 
zed Company. 

4.  I  live  peaceably  under  fuch  Bifhops  as  have  many  hundred  Parifhes, 
and  no  Epifiopos  Gregis,  true  Bifhops  and  Paftoral  Churches  under  them, 
as  they  think :  Eut  I  own  not  their  Conftitution. 

5.  I  joyn  with  all  the  Churches  in  England  as  Affociated  for  rnutual 
help  and  Concord  in  all  that  the  Scripture  prefcribeth,  and  in  all  the  Pro- 
teftant  Religion,  and  all  that  all  Chriflian  Churches  are  agreed  in, 
and  all  that  is  truly  needful  to  the  ends  of  Chriftianity :  Eut  not  absolute- 
ly in  all,  which  their  Canons,  Liturgy  &c.  conttaine:  Efpecially  their  fin* 
ful  Impositions,  and  their  Prefumtious  Canonical  "Excommunications  of  dif-^ 
tenters  ipfo  fafto. 

<5.  I  am  one  of  the  Chriflian  Kingdom  of  England,  as  under  the  King 
according  to  the  Oaths  of  Allegiance  and  Supremacy  »  and  am  for  obeying 
the  Laws  and  Rules  in  all  things  lawfully  belonging  to  their  Power  to 
command.  But  not  for  obeying  them  in  fin,  againft  God,  nor  for  believ- 
i  ng  all  to  be  Lawful  becaufe  they  command  it  i  nor  for  their  taking  down 
Family  Government  or  felf  Government,  and  decerning  private  Judgment 
of  the  fubjects.     This  is  my  meafureof  feparation. 

§  14.  .  And  I  think  in  cafes  that  concern  our  own  and  many  mens  Salva- 
tion we  ihould  have  leave  freely  to  fpeakfbrour  felvesi  and  not  be  ufed  as 
we  are,  that  muft  neither  be  endured  to  be  filent,  or  tofpeak.  Let  this  Dr. 
open  our  cafe  to  you  himfelf,  faith  he  £  Pref.  p.  3  6.  Speaking  of  my  firir 
Plea  for  Peace  [  As  though  it  had  been  defignedon  purpofeto  reprefent  the  Cler- 
gy of  our  Church  as  a  Company  of  Notorious,  Lying  and  Perjured  Villains  for 
Conforming  1 0  the  Laws  of  the  Land  and  orders  eflabli/hed  among  us  :  For  there 
are  no  left,  than  thirty  tremendous  aggravations  of  the  fin  of  Conformity  fet  down 
ink  and  all  this  done  without  the  leafi  provocation  given  on  our  fide ~]   And  elf- 

where 


1*7 1 

where  he  faith  he  (hall  lefs  regard  my  aggravation. 

Anf.  l.  If  I  do  that  which  you  think  as  bad,  I  would  gladly  be  told 
of  it  f  though  falfe  accufations  Idefirenot)  And  impenitence  is  too  foon 
learnt  without  a  Teacher  or  Academical  degrees,  and  I  had  rather  be  fav- 
cdfrom  it.  2.  But  Reader  I  once  more  appeal  to  the  Judgment  of  all 
reafon  and  humanity  as  well  as  Chriftianity,  to  decide  the  cafe  of  this 
Accufation. 

i.  Wedidin,  1660,  and  1661.  All  that  we  were  able  by  labour  pe- 
tition and  yielding  as  far  as  we  durit  for  fear  of  iin  and  Hell,  to  have 
been  united  and  lived  in  Church  Concord  with  the  Epifcopal  party. 

2.  Wrien  our  labour  and  hopes  were  fruftrate  and  twothoufand  of  us 
caftoutofthe  Miniftery,  and  afterwards  laws  made  againft  us  as  Con- 
venticlers,  firfi  for  our  Fining,  Imprifonment,  and  then  Banishment,  and 
after  beiides  Imprifonment  to  pay  twenty  pound  the  firft  Sermon,  and 
forty  pound  thesnext  and  fb  on  i  when  after  this  the  Law  that  banifhed 
us  from  all  Cities,  Corporations,  &c.  and  places  where  we  lately  Preach- 
ed ,  did  moft  deeply  accufe  us  as  the  caufe  j  I  never  wrote  fo  much  as  the 
reafonsofour  diflent:  When  by  the  execution  of  thefe  Laws  we  u 
by  Informers  and  others  ufed,  as  is  well  known,  I  was  Rill  Client,  My 
not  conforming  (hewed  my  diflent,  but  Idurft  not  fo  much  as  once  tell 
them  why,  left  it  mould  more  exafperate  them. 

3  .  At  lait  I  was  often  told  that  the  Bilhop  that  fir  ft  forbad  my  Preach- 
ing, and  many  others  after  him,  oft  faid  to  Great  men,  Mr.  Baxter  kc; 
up  a  Schifm,  ai:d  yet  holds  all  our  conformity  lawful,  lave  rum 
rebellious  Covenant,     And  I  yet  continued  (ilenr. 

4.  At  laft  they  wrote  againft  us,  that  we  durfl  not  fay  that  any  fart  of" 
Conformity  was  fin,  but  only  inconvenient . 

5.  Then  many  Pulpits  and  books  proclaim  ,  that  roe  againft  our  Con- 
fciences  kgpt  np  a  Scbifm ,  for  a  baffled  caufe  which  we  had  nothing  to  fay 

for. 

6.  All  this  wlvle  Lords  and  Commons  ufed  to  ask  us,  what  is  it  tba 
would have,  and  what  kgepeth  you  from  Conformity,    [in  private   talk,  but 
would  never  allow  us  to  fpeak  for  our  fclves  and  give  the  world  or  Par* 
liamentour  reafons  ]. 

7.  Many  years  together  Pulpits  and  Printed  Books  of  the  Clergy, 
eryed  out  to  the  Magiftratcs  to  execute  the  Laws  againft  us,  fand  as  one 
faid  fet  fire  toth  Fagot )  >  and  blamed  them  tor  not  doing  it. 

8.  When  the  King  gave  us  his  Licence,  they  were  gieatly  offended, 
asaforeiaid. 

$>-  At  lair  one  great  Bifhop  fold  me  that  he  wo  ild  defirc  th  Kir.r  to 

E  2  conftram 


[a8] 

conilraine  us  to  give  our  reafons,  and  not  keep  up  aSchffm,  and  not  tell 
for  what.  And  another  greater  told  me,  that  the  King  tool^usto  be  not 
fincere,  that  would  not  give  our  reafons.  And  all  this  while  I  durit  not  give 
them,  as  knowing  how  they  would  be  received. 

io.  When  the  Bifhops  kept  me  from  Preaching  and  gave  me  leifure, 
Iwrote.  i.  An  Apology  tor  our  Preaching,  2.  A  Treatife  of  Epifcopi- 
cy  and  divers  other  fuch,  and  yet  durft  not  Print  them  fnor  indeed  could 
do  it.) 

1 i .  At  laft  after  about  feventeen  or  eighteen,  years  filence ,  by 
fuch  importunity  (  and  the  Prefs  being  more  open  )  1  ventured  firii 
but  to  write  my  firlt  Plea  for  Peace,  which  only  nameth  matter  ofFad:, 
and  our  bare  Judgment,  enumerating  the  things  which  we  think  <in, 
without  our  Arguments,  left  it  mould  provoke  them  more.  And  there- 
in profeiTed  that  (knowing  mens  different  Educations,  frudies,  interefts, 
&c. )  I  did  not  by  this  accufe  the  Conformists,  nor  the  Law  makers, 
but  only  tell,  i*  What!  thought  woddbefininm^  2.  And  bow  great  a  fin  > 
if  we  conformed. 

Reader,  fbouldl  have  flayed  longer  (the  final  Tradr  of  Sacrilegious 
defertionof  the  Miniftry,  came  out  when  we  were  licenfed,  but  ventured 
not  to  name  the  matters  of  our  Nonconformity )  what  could  we  do  lefs  > 
I  ftaid  till  I  think  half  the  filenced  Minittcrs  were  dead*  Is  the  call  offu- 
psrkurs,  the  Intereft  of  our  Miniftry,  and  Confciences  of  Co  little  re- 
gard as  that  Imuft  not  tell  men  that  fo  loud  and  loi.g  had  asked, 
rvhats  the  matter  f  Mud  we  neither  he  filent  nor  fpeak  ? 

And  now  fee  here,  i-  If  Dean  Stillingfleet  be  a  man  to  be  believed  in 
fuch  accufations,  [All  this  was  dune  by  rne,  without  the  leafi  provocation  on  their 
fide~\  wonderful  diiference  /  Is  my  naming  what  I  think  God  forbids  me, 
io  great  a  provocation  to  them,  and  is  all  this  for  feventeen  years  before 
named  £  not  the  leafi  provocation  to  us  on  their  part  ?  What  fhall  one  think 
could  bring  fuch  a  man  to  fuch  a  word  ? 

2.  And  that  which  I  profeit  that  I  wrote  not  to  accufe  them,  he  tells 
you  was  [_as  if  deigned  to  reprefentthenaasa  Company  of  notorious  lying; 
Perjured  Villains..     This  Colleclion  I  feared  \  But  how  could  I  avoid  it  ? 
Mull  not  I  tell  them  that  urge  me,  what  fin  I  fear,  leaft  they  fay  you  re* 
frefent  us  as  fuch  ? 

3.  See  here  how  they  talkof  us  contrarily  as  the  Barbarians  of  Paxl0 
that  now  make  him  a  Murderer,  and  anon  a  God  >  For  many  years  to- 
gether, our  Lords  and  Matters  perfwaded  men  that  we  took  Conformi- 
ty to  be  no  iin,  fave  renouncing  the  Covenant  :  And  now  how  Contra - 
tj\?  Its  the  reprefentation  of  a  Company  of  notorious,  Iving  ,    perjur* 

ed, 


[=93 

td  Villains,  with  thirty  tremendous  aggravations.  Repent  0  England, 
faith  Bradford  at  the  ftake.  But  who  would  have  thought  that  Repen- 
tance had  been  fo  hard  a  work,  in  a  cafe  called  fo  heynous,  and  that 
to  the  Preachers  of  Repentance,  as  it  is  either  to  them  or  to  us,  whicii 
ever  it  be  that  is  found  in  the  guilt. 


CHAP.    IV. 

Of  his  Hiflory  of  the  cafe  of  the  old  Nonconform  ifis. 

§  i.     A  S  to  what  he  faith  of  the  famenefs  of  the  former  Cafe  and  ours, 
ll  I  fhall  cell  him  the  ditferc nee  after,  where  he  more  calls  me  to 
in  Andfhall  (hew  him  fo  much  difference,  as  will  difcredit  thisafTer- 
tion. 

§2.  As  to  the  cafe  of  the  old  Nonconforming,  i.  It  mud  be  premif- 
ed  that  we  take  them  not  for  any  of  our  rule,  but  cleave  to  Gods  word 
and  the  example  ef  the  Primitive  Church,  looking  ftill  at  the  great  ends 
of  order  and  Government. 

2.  We  maintain  as  well  as  he  that  the  Chief  Nonconforming  were 
asgainft  that  called  Brownifm  or  Separation  ,  and  wrote  more  again!;  it 
than  the  Conforming  did. 

3.  I  ftill  profefs  my  felf  to  be  of  their  Judgment  in  this,  and  have 
pradtifed  accordingly. 

4.  But  they  were  not  again  ft  fuch  Preachings  or  anyfuch  fort  ol 
paration  as-I  have  either  pradtifed  or  defended. 

§3.  Here  therefore  it  muft  be  known  what  the  Controverfie  betw 
them  and  thefeparatifts  was.  1.  The  higher  fort  of  iepararilts  Grid,  that 
the  Church  of  England  was  no  true  Church.     The  Nonconforming,  faid 
it  was  a  true  National  Church   both   as  a  Chrifiian- Kingdom,    and  as 
an   Aflbciation   of   Churches  >  (and  as  represented    in   National    S. 
ods  were  they  made  one. ) 

2.  The  faid  Brownifts  fatd— that  the  Parifti   Churches    were  no  : 
Churches,  nor  to  be  owned  as  fucli,  nor  joyned  with.   The  Nenconf< 
taifts  held  that  they  are  true  Churches,  (-that  have  capable  Minifies 
though  faulty. 

3.  The  feparatifts  faid  that  the  Parifh  Mini  iiers  were  no  true  Mini;. 
becaufe  ordained  by  Diocefans  and  notchofen  by  the  people,  &c.  J 
Nonconforming  faid,  thatthe  capable  were  trae  though  faulty  Miniftt 

t   3  QW 


owned  by  the  peoples  confenting  communion  ,    and  the  ordination  va- 
lid though  culpable. 

4.  The  feparatifts  faid  that  Minifters  and  people muft  gather  Church- 
es that  are  purer.,  and  letup  better  dilcipline  in  them,  whatever  Rulers  fay 
or  do  againft  if.,  or  whatever  they  fuffer,  as  far  as  they  are  able.  The 
Nonconform  fts  faid,  this  is  to  be  done  where  it  may  be  done  without  dol- 
ing more  hurt  than  good,  but  elfe  itisnoduty  but  a  fin,  viz,  Todo  it 
Tumultuoufly,  Seditiously,  or  foasby  runningon  the  Magiftrates  fword, 
by  improbable  attempts  to  lofe  their  own  advantages  for  doing  and 
getting  good,  and  hinder  the  common  parifh  reformation. 

5.  The  Separating  faid  that  no  prohibition  of  the  Magiilrate  will  war- 
rant a  Miniflcr  to  forbear  the  publick  work  of  his  office.  The  Noncon- 
forming held  that  it  belongeth  to  the  Magiftrate  toreftrain  deceivers  and 
all  falfe  Teachers  who  do  more  hurt  than  good*  and  fuch  mould  obey 
when  they  are  forbidden  to  Preach  and  Adminifter  Sacraments  :  Yea  if 
the  Magiflrate  wrongfully  forbid  a  worthy  Minifter  to  Preach,  for  or- 
der he  is  bound  to  obey,  unlets  tke  need  of  the  Church  and  Souls,  and 
the  probable  benefit  plainly  weigh  down  that  matter  of  order,  and  make 
the  Magiftratcs  prohibition  invalid  ,  as  being  againft  the  corrmon  good, 
and  the  ends  of  the  Min'ftry,  and  foagainlT  Chriit. 

6.  The  fern;- feparatifts  (Robinfons  party  )  after  held  that  though  the 
Parifh  Churches  may  be  called  true  Churches, as  a  Leper  is  a  true  man,  and 
it  may  be  lawful  to  hear  a  Sermon  in  them,  ye.t  the  Common- prayer  is  fo 
bad,  and  the  people  and  Minifters  fo  bad,  and  difcipline  fo  call  out 
that  it  is  unlawful  to  joyn  with  them  in  Common-prayer,  or  Sacrament, 
or  to  become  fetlea  members  of  them  j  but  all  muft  attempt,  though 
in  Forreign  Countreys,  that  are  able,  to  fet  up  purer  worfhip  and  dif- 
cipline- The  Nonconform] lis  held  that  thofe  that  can  have  Letter  with- 
out more  hurt  than  good,  mould  cbcofe  it:  But  they  that  cannot  may 
joyn  in  member -(hip,  Common-prayer  and  Sacrament,  with  fuch  Parifh 
Churches  as  will  admit  them  without  their  own  a&ualiin,  and  cenfent^ 
ing  to  their  faults. 

§.  4.  I  mall  now  give  you  fo  full  proof  that  the  Nonconforming  were 
fcr  more,  which  the  Dc&orcalleth  Siparation^  than  my  Preaching  or 
piadice  ever  reached  to,  as  I  (hall  tell  the  Reader,  what  credit  this 
Do&ors  hiftory  deferveth,  and  what  inhumane  ufuage  the  Nonconfor- 
mity have  from  that  fort  of  men. 

§.  5.  Anno  159^  Was  printed  againft  them  Bifhop  Bancroft's  book 
cil led,  Dangerous  Portions  and  Proceedings  &c.  Or  Engl/Jh  Scut i zing  for 
Vijcipline  by  force  3cc.     In  the  firfl  book  he  mafc-th  their  Reformations 

fo 


Co  odious,  as  that  Page  30.  He  faith  that  in  Scotland  [itbatb  wrought 
more  mi) 'chief  in  'thirty year s,  than  the  Pipe  of  Rome  had  done  before,  as  I 
thinks  in  five  hundred^  you  fee  how  that  Spirit  then  did  work,and  whether 
our  Arch-Bi»hop  Bancroft  thought  better  of  the  Presbyterian  Churches 
or  the  Pope,  and  the  Effects. 

In  the  Second  book  he  taketh  up  what  ram  words  he  could   from  a- 
ny  indifcreet  men  to  make  them  odious. 

In  the  third  he  (heweth  what  the    F.nglim  Nonconforming  did  tor 
their  Church-way  and  Difcipline.     Chap.  i.p.  42.  He  faith  that  the  nrir 
Ten  or  Eleven  years  of  the  Queens  Reign  they  fo  clamoured  &c.  tint 
they  divided  themfelves  from  their  ordinary  Congregations,  and  meet- 
ing in  houfes,  woods  and  fields,  kept  there  unlawful  and  diforderly  Conven- 
ticles :  and  Mr.  Cartwright  defendeth  them,  faying,  that  the  nam*  of  Con- 
venticles was  too  light  and  contemptuous  for  them  \  Then  they  framed  their 
two  admonitions:    In  one  of  which  p.  60,  61.    They  tell  the  Parlia- 
ment that  their  Difcipline  was  Gods  order,  and  they  mull  in  Confcience  fpe\ 
for  it,    and  ttfe  it.     And  Anno   1572.    They    eredred    a  Presbytery  at 
IVandfworth.      The   Elders   are  named.     The  perfons  named    chat  fet 
up    meetings  are    Mr.    Field  ,    Wilcox  ,    Standen  ,    Jickjon  ,  Bentham  , 
Sander,   Crane,    Edmonds,  and  after  ClarJ^,    Travers,    Barber,     Gardiner, 
Cheflon,  Crooks  Egerton.     Anno  1582.  There  was  a  meeting  of  threefcore 
Minifters  out  of  Effex,  Cambridg-fljire  and  Norfolk^  at  Cock^field,  Mr.  Knew* 
Jiubs  Town.      And   another  that  year  at  a  Commencement  at  Cam- 
bridge, 

Chap.  3.  That  they  drew  up  a  book  of  their  Difcipline,  where  choice 
of  Minillers,    Elders,   Deacons  &c.  are  named  and  regulated,  and  for 
Claffical,  Provincial,    Comitial  Synods  and  Government.     Chip.  4.  He 
tells  ycu  how    they  profecuted  it  Anno  1583.  Out  of  Chohnky,  Field, 
Fen  ,  Wdcox,  Axton,    Gellebrand,   IF  right,   Gifford.    Chap.    5.  How  they 
proceeded.      1587.      And   1590-     Northampton- fkin  was    divided  into 
three  ClalTes.  Firfr  the  Northampton  Claifs  had  Mr.  Snape,  Penrie,  Sibthorp, 
Edwards,  Littleton,  Bradfhaw,  Lar\,  F leftward,  Spicer  &c.     The  T>ai.   - 
trie  Clailis  had  Mr.  Barebon,   R  gers,  King,  Smart,    Sharp,  Prowdloe,  El- 
lijhn&c.      The  Ktttcring  Galas  had  Mr.  Stone,  WdliamCon .  Fallybrook^, 
Patinfon  ,  Majfey  &c.     And  Jahnfon  faith  it  was  received  in  IVarwick^ftirt 
Sufoll^,   Norfolk  Effex,  and  molt  parts  ©f  England  j  fo  Smith,    Hangjr, 
Holme  witnefs,  Mr  Snape  faid.     About  Braintne  the  ClaiTis  had  Mr.  Cul- 
t'erwel,  Mr.  Rogers,  Mi.  Gifford,  (one  of  our  Doctor's  wittneflesjdh'. 
That  at  Colchejhr  had  Doctor  Chap. nan,  Doitor Chric1^,   Mr.  Dowe,  Mr. 
Farrar,  Mr.  Newman,  Mr-  ley,  &c.     Page  85.    Mr.  Snape  CM,  It  wasa* 

greed 


C30 

£reed  en  in  theCIafTical  and  general  affemblies,  that  the  dumb  Minifrers 
were  no  Minifters,  and  that  all  the  Minifters  (hould  Preach  for  the  afor.- 
faid  Governmen  t- 

Chap.  6.  Anno  15S8.  A  Synod  at  Cmuuij  agreed  againft  private  Bap- 
tifm,   reading  Homilies,  the  Oofs  in  Baptifm,    and  that  the  faithful 
ot  to  communicate  with  unlearned  ( they  mean  uncapable  )  Mi- 
nitte  may  be  pre  lent  at  their  Service,  if  they  come  of  pur- 

pofe  to  heir  a  Sermon.  For  Laymen  may  read  publick  Service.  That 
the  callingof  Biftiops  &c*  is  unlawful.  That  it  is  not  lawful  to  be  or- 
dained by  them,  or  denounce  their  Sufpentions  or  Excommunications. 
That  its  not  lawful  to  reft  in  the  Eimcps  deprivation  of  any  from  the 
Miniliry. except  on  confultation  with  neighbour  Minifters  and  their  flock, 
it  feemsfo  good  to  therm  but  that  he  continue  in  the  fame  till  he  be 
mpelkd  to  the  contrary  by  Civil  force,  ccc  And  the  Difcipline  fub- 
fcribed  by  Cartwrigbt,  Fen,  Wright,  Oxenbridge,GeIlylrand,C  N*t~ 

ier,  Fetberihne,  Helm,  Lord  &c.     To  repeat  all  is  too   tedious. 

Putits  worth  the  noteing  that  whereas  the  Prelatifts  ufually  fay,  that 

rebzn  they  were  pit    to  draw  up  a  Liturgy  tbemj:.  Tree  of  a- 

ny,  Bithop  Bancroft  faith  Page  p<5.  Iloey  offered  the  Parliament  a  ho^sf  their 

wmm\  containing  the  form  of  Common -prayers  dec*   and  hoped  to  have  had  it 

abrifhed. 

Tage  164.  Chap.  12.  He  tells  you  of  their  ordf  r  for  Parents  to  offer 
their  own  Children  to  Baptifm,  and  be  Godfathers  &c.  H?  proceedeth 
to  (hew  that  they  rcfolved  to  pra&ice  their  Difcipline  againit  the  Ma- 
giftrateswill,  and  did  accordingly.  And  Chap.  15./?.  120.  That  they 
foyned  chemfelres  into  an  Alfociation  or  brother- hood,  and  appropriated 
to  their  meetings  the  name  of  the  Church,  thereby  (hewing  themfelves 
to  be  moft  notorious  Schifmaticks,  citeing  their  words (  our  Churches) 
And  p.  121.  That  the  Pari(h  where  they  preach  alTembied,  is  not  the 
Church' pi operly  in  their  fence,  but  as  many  thereof  only  asarejoyned 
to  them  with  that  inviolable  bond,  viz.  The  deiire  of  the  godly  Dif- 
cipline, and  thofe  furthermore  who  leaving  their  own  Parifh  Churches 
ccme  to  them.  e.g.  The  Church  of  God,  forfcoth  in  Blackjryars  confifts 
befides  that  Pariih  of  a  number  of  men  and  Merchants  wives  difperfed 
here  and  there  throughout  the  whole  City.  Mr. ■  S nape's  tefrimony  is 
cited. 

§  6.  Ey  thefe  words  of  Bancroft  and  the  cafe  compared,  it  is  cer- 
tain that  on  thefe  fuppofitions  many  of  the  Canons  were  made  again/i 
themj  as  againft  Conventicles  and  calling  themfelves  another  Church, 
and  a  brother-hood,  and  about  God  fathers  and  many  more ,  fuppo- 
fjogthemtobe  of  this  mind.  §  7. 


§  7.  On  fuppofirion  that  thcfe  things  were  true,  the  N  :  r :  -  - :  r  - 
mills  have  to  this  day  been  accuied  by  thofe  that  write  again  ft  them, 
and  the  teirioiony  of  this  book  alledged  as  proof.  And  Doctor  Utyhn 
hath  in  folio  accordingly  defcribed  them  in  his  Kil;ery  of  Presbytery, 
as  many  others  have  done. 

§  8.    And  now  cometh  Doctor  StUlimgjket^  and  tdls  yon,  that  [ 
em ain  that  all  tbt  §ld  Nrmmifmmifls  ~\  were  quite  of  another  mind,  and 
other  men,  and  to  prove  it  citetbfour  or  £ve  mens  words  against  Ercw* 
nifis  i     When  yet  he  citeth  rrore  of  my  own  againft  Reparation :  and  if 
my  wcrds  zicvt  ~.t   r.~:   :c  zt  izi ::.:':  ;:.     [  _-.v  -*:'.'.  :h:i:5  z: :  v;  :'  t~  ' : 
be  againi:ir? 

$  p.  Either  Bancrofts^  Hgylias  and  fuch  others  words  of  them  are  troe 
or  felfe.  If  fnre,  how  untrue  are  Doctor  Stilliagfktt's?  IffaMe,  O 
what  a  fort  of  men  were  thefe  Prelates  that  (b  frigrnatized  and  accufed 
and  fo  tiled  lb  many  hundred  fuch  men,  on  fo  lalfe  a  charge  ?  And 
what  a  Church  was  it  that  made  the  Canons  again!?  them  on  that 
fuppofition?  And  how  Gull  we  know  which  of  them  to  believe  >  Doth 
not  Doctor  Stillingf&t  heavily  reproach  his  own  Church  for  fcch 
ufuage  of them  ?. 

§  10.  The  cafe  is  commonly  known,  Firfi  that  a  long  time  they 
had  almoft  a]]  of  them  ParUh  Churches  as  other  men  had  r  and  they 
fought  to  let  up  Discipline  in  thole  Churches.  And  it  had,  been  folly 
then  to  gather  others  in  other  places. 

2.  When  Bancroft  and  others  had  gc:  many   af:  -cur  and   deuced, 
a  great  part  of  them  kept  in  by  connivence  of  feme  peaceable  BiuV 
and  by  the  mediation  of  fome  Lords  and  Gentlemen,  fuch  as  the  Earl  of 
Laafier,  Bedford  JFanrkJ^^  the  Lord  &*£&%,  Sir  Framdi,  Walfngham^ 
Sir  Annas  ?«r/«r,  Sir  Nutrias  2tam,  Mr.  Btaly  and  Sir  Fronds  KmmUr 
had  been  to  them  before:  Yea  the  greater  part  of  them  by  fuch  favour 
got  into  privikdged  peculiar  places,cr  little  Chapells  at  ieafr,  Few  Coun- 
ties  had  not  fome  Gentlemen  that  iheltred  them.  The  EarlofHnr?*  - 
urn  kept  in  Mr.  Hildafham  at  Afkby  ,  Mr.  Slater  and  Mr.  Afh,  even  in  the 
big  Town  of  Bnmkbam^  Mr.  SLnntrariKg  kept  in  Mr.  Ball  at  W'chwsre  i 
Mr.  Kmrhtlty  kept  in  Mr.  V*a\  J^dge  Brantley  (  and  his  humble  laoly  La- 
dy )  kept  Mr.  Brnmrlnll  at  Sheriff  Hales,  and  entertained  many  moref  Mr. 
Nio//  &e.j  Sir  Kkbard  Graves  at  Mtfdty  bad  Mr.  Postman  and  divers  o- 
thersjeldom  without  a  Non-con  formiit :  One  would  thick  Dccror  Stillmg- 
flea  (hould  know  that  his  c  wa  Patron, under  whole  wing  he  Iived,Sir  K 
Bxrrir.it  was  feldom  withe;.:  2  Nonconfca  naift  at  Rnxkkl  in  JFamt^ 
fan:  hU.Htring  had  long  liberty  at  a  Sbixmsbtry^  Mr.  F§rd 

h  ( m 


C343 

(who  wrote  on  the  Tfalms)  had  the  School  Le&ure  there,  Mr.  Atkins 
at  lipton,  kept  in  to  the  laft,  even  the  Lord  Dudley,  favouring  him. 
Abundance  fuch  I  might  name,  Mr.  B.irnet,  at  Vppington  (whom  I  oft 
heard  Catechize  Dr.  Alleflree,)  Mr.  'Tandy  at  Bewdley,  Mr.  Lingley,  Mr. 
Paget,  Mr.  Hind,  Mr.  Lancafter  ,  Mr.  Rowle,  Mr.  Nieols ,  Mr.  Mather^ 
Mr.  Ratbbandf  Mr.  Barbon,  Mr.  Gee,  Mr.  JVrigbt,  Mr.  Smart,  dec,  had 
their  liberties  for  fome  time.  And  when  one  Bilhop  filenced  them,  the 
next  oft  gave  them  liberty  (as  Bimop  Eridgnun  did  after  Bi(hop  Mortons 
filencing  fome)  and  when  they  were  filenced,  they  went  oft  into  another 
Dioce!e,where  they  rubd  out  a  year  or  more,  and  then  to  another  »  And  lo 
were  mil  in  fome  hope  of  publick  liberty. 

And  when  filenced  they  ufed  to  kcepe  private  faftsi  And  where  they 
'odged  topreach  on  pretenfeof  expounding  to  as  many  as  they  could. 

They  obeyed  the  Biftiops  as  Magistrates,  but  not  as  Pallors. 

They  knowingly  broke  the  Law  in  their  private  and  publick  Miniflry  v 
They  obeyed  not  the  Canons ;  ufed  not  much  of  the  Liturgy  y  And  many 
of  them  did  as  fome  do  now,  get  into  publick  Pulpits  for  a  day  and  away, 
where  they  were  not  known. 

§.  12.  But  yet  there  are  more  undeniable  evidences  of  the  falfenefsof 
what,  he  faith,  he  is  certain  of,  as  the  judgment  of  AH the  Old  Nonconform 
mfts.  One  is  the  known  judgement  of  the  Scotch  Reformers,  and  the 
common  accufationof  theEnglim,  as  being  of  their  mind.  He  that  will 
affirm  that  the  Scotch  Presbyterians  thought  it  unlawful  to  preach  or 
hold  Aflemblies,  when  forbidden  by  Magifhrates  or  Prelates,  will  incur  a 
very  (harp  cenfure  from  their  own  Leaders,  who  have  written  fo  many 
Books ,  which  charge  them  with  the  contrary,  aud  make  them  Rebels 
and  Seditious  for  it  :  Such  as  Bancroft,  Hey  tin,  Beziers,  and  multitudes  both 
old  and  new  v  efpecially   thefe  lalt  twenty  years. 

And  though  the  Nonconform  ills  in  England  did  not  juftifie  all  that  the 
Scots  did  (  and  they  that  took  Knox,  Bucbanan,  Melvin,  and  fuch  other  for 
very  pious  men,  yet  thought  fome  words  and  deeds  too  rafh,  efpecially 
Knox's  publick  opening  the  Queens  faults  in  the  Pulpit,  and  refufingher 
offer  to  come  at  any  time,  and  tell  her  of  them  privately  J  yet  its  known, 
that  in  the  Rules  of  Difcipline,  they  were  moftly  of  the  fame  judgment : 
And  they  often  joyned  in  defending  the  fame  Caufe.  See  their  fcveral 
dcmonltrations  of  Difcipline,  and  the  feveral  Defences  of  them,  how  lit- 
tle they  differed,  when  Bancroft  preacht  againft  them  at  Pauls  Crofs,  Feb. 
8. 1588.  An  Englifh  man  wrote  a  Brief  Difcovery  of  his  untruths,  &c. 
And  a  Scoth  man  J,  ~D.  Bancrofts  rajhnefs  in  railing  againji  tbe  Cburcb  of 
Scotland,  printed  159c*  And  how  little  differ  they,  if  at  all  (and  Dr. 

Reignolds 


[35] 

Reignoids  wrote  a  Letteragainft  it  to  Sir  Francis  Knowles,  printed  with  { 
Francis  Knowles  his  account  to  the  Lord  Burleigh  of  his  Speech  in  Parlia- 
ment, againft  the  Bifhops  keeping  Courts   in  their  own  names,  as  con- 
demned by  Law. 

And  in  many  of  their  writings  the  Engliih  own  the  Scotch  Difdr 
and  Church.     And  yet  even  thefe  Scots  have  rejected  Brown  as  a  Schil- 
matick,  and  the  Engl  ifh  Confuter  of  Bancrofts  Sermon  tells  him,  P^.43, 
44.  Brown  a  hyorvn  Schifrmtick^  is  a  Fit  man  to  be  one  of  your  Wttntjfa  a- 
againft:  the   Elderfhip  :  His  entertainment  in  Scotland  was  fucb  as  a  proud 
ungodly  man  deferred  to  have  :  God  give  him  and  yon  repentance.     And  G//- 
fordsy  Pagets,  Bradjharvs,  Brigbtmans,Ratbbands,  Balls,  &c  words  again  ft  tl 
Brownifts  proved  not  them  to  be  againfr  their  own  doctrine  and  pradtk 
no  more  than  the  Scots  rejecting  Brown  proved  them  againft  theirs. 

§  13.  And  another  proof  is  the  common  doctrine  of  the  Nonconfor- 
ming, of  the  difference  of  the  Magiftrates,  and  the  Churches  Orh.- 
♦Thc  faid  confutation  of  Bancroft  hath  it,  pag.  45  and  forward,  and  abun- 
dance of  their  publick  writings  j  viz.  That  the  Magistrate  only  hath  the 
power  of  the  Sword,  and  of  Civil  Government,  and  to  reftrain  and  pu- 
fiifti  Miniftersthat  offend  by  Herefie  orotherwife:  But  that  as  Preach- 
ing,Sacraments  and  the  difciplinary  11  fc  of  the  Keys  are  proper  to  the  Mini  - 
(try,  fothe  deciding  ot  Circumlhntial  controvcrlies  about  them  and  a- 
bout  the  due  ordering  of  them,  doth  primarily  belong  to  Eccleliaftical 
Synods.  Therefore  if  thefe  Synods  were  for  their  Preaching,  they  were 
not  for  cealing  itmeerly  in  obedience  to  the  Magiftrate  that  fl'enced 
them. 

§  14.  And  it  is  proved  by  the  many  Volumes  which  they  wrote  againft 
the  Power  of  our  Diocefans ,  that  it  was  not  any  Ecclcfiaitical  Au- 
thority of  theirs  (which  they  thought  it  a  (in  to  difobey.J 

§15.  And  Mr.  Fcx,  a  Nonconforming  and  many  more  of  them,  own 
the  Doclrine  of  Wiclijf  and  John  Huffe,  and  the  Bohemians,  for  which 
the  Synods  of  Conflance  and  Eafil ,  condemned  them,  who  afnrm  that  it 
is  a  heynousim  to  give  over  Preaching,  becaufe  men  excommunicate  us, 
and  that  fuch  are  excommunicated  by  Chriir. 

§  i<5.  And  it  is  not  nothing  that  the  molt  Learned  Conforming  agree 
with  them,  as  I  have  oft  cited  Eifhop  hilfons  words,  that  the  Magiftrate 
doth  nor  give  us  our  power,  nor  may  hinder  our  ufeofit,  but  is  appoint- 
ed by  God  to  protect  and  encourage  us,  and  if  he  forbid  or  hinder  us, 
weare  to  go  on  with  our  work  and  patiently  fcti 

And  even  now  I  believe  moft  of  the  Leading  Clergy  think  that  if  a  Sy- 
nod bid  us  preach  and  hold  aiTcmblics,  and  the  King  forbid  it:  we  ?tc 

F  2  re 


[?0 

to  obey  the  Synod  rather  than  the  King^  Mr.  tborndike ,  and  many  o- 
thers. that  write  for  the  Church  thought  (b.  And  Mr.  Vodwel  thinks  fo 
even  of  a  particular  Biihop.  The  difference  then  is  but  this:  One  par- 
ty giveth  this  power  to  a  Synod  of  Eifhops  (and  Presbyters  perhaps con- 
joyned)  and  the  other  to  a  Synod  of  Parochial  Pallors,  Doctors  and  El- 
ders. But  both  agreed  that  the  Magiftrates  prohibition  in  that  cafe  is  not 
to  be  obeyed.  And  the  Conformists  will  not  take  it  well  if  I  (hould  fay 
that  the  Nonconform^  are  more  for  obedience  to  Magiilrates  than  they: 
I  lull  except  the  Erafiians,  and  fuch  as  own  Dr.  Stillingfteets  Irenicon. 

§  17.  There  is  a  molt  conikicrable  book  called  A  Petition  direfted  to 
for  moji  Excellent  Majefiyfoeiving  a  meane  how  to  compound  the  Civil  Dif- 
fcnti.vis  in  the  Church  of  England ,  where  the  Author  ("I  fuppofe  fome 
Lawyer)  Pag,-  23.  tells  us  what  was  the  difference  between  the  Papifis 
and  them  that  delired  Reformation  (Nonconforming)  about  the  power 
of  Magiftratc?.  And,  I.  Ibey  give  the  Prince  Authority  over  all  Perfons 
Ecclefiajtical  wbatfoever  >  'the  Papifis  exempt  the  Clergy  :  2.  they  hold  that 
a  Prince  may  depofe  a  Priefi  ,  as  Solomon  did  Abiather,  and  accordingly 
they  obey  being  filenced :  7be  Tapifis  deny  it.  3:  they  affirm ,  if  the  Priefis 
makg  wicked  decrees,  the  Prince  may  enforce  them  to  better.  7he  Papifis  deny 
it.  4.  they  fay  Princes  mu\\  and  ought  to  make  Laws  for  the  Church,  but  with 
the  advife  of  Godly  Paftors  :  the  Papifis  deny  it.  5.  they  hold  that  if  the  Paft- 
orsbe  unlearned  and  ungodly,  the  Prince  may  of  bimfelf  without  their  advife, 
make  Orders  and  Laws  ,  for  EcclefiajHcal  matters  :  the  Papifis  deny  it.  6. 
they  will  fubcribe  in  this  point  to  the  Articles  of  Religion  eftablifljed  by  Law  \ 
to  the  Apology  of  the  Church  of  England,  to  the  writings  of  Jewel,  Horn, 
Nowel,  Whitaker,  Bilfon,  Fulk.     ibey  takg  the  Oath  of  Supremacy: 

Here  the  fecond  Article  feemeth  to  be  contrary  to  what  I  have  faid. 
But  the  book  whence  he  citetji  it  (dedifcipl.  Ecclef.  )  and  all  their  writ- 
ings (hew,  that  it  is  but  the  fame  that  I  fay,  which  they  aflert,  viz.  That 
Princes  ought  to  reftrain  or  (ilence  intolerable  men,  and  fuch  Ufupers  or 
dilinquents  as  give  juft  caufe.  2.  That  if  they  miftakeanddo  it  unju/h 
ly,  we  mult  leave  Temple  and  Tyths  to  their  will.  3.  Yea,  and  forbear  our 
own  publick  Preaching  when  the  publick  good  on  the  account  of  order 
and  peace  requireth  it  j  but  not  when  the  publick  good,  and  the  necefc 
iity  of  Souls,  and  our  own  opportunities  require  the  contrary.  And  the  fi* 
lenced  that  fubmitted  ftill,went  on  to  exercife  their  Miniftry  againft  Law 
in  that  manner  as  beft  conduced  to  its  ends. 

And  what  this  Auother  faith  of  the  Papifts,  I  fuppofe  many  of  the 
higheft  Prelatifts  come  nearer  then  the  Nonconforming  »  and  were  the 
Prince  againft  them,  would  obey  the  Bifhops  before  him. 

And 


[37] 

And  the  fame  book  defer ibing  the  Nonconformists  in  twenty  An 
p.  55.  in  the  8^.  thus  expoundcth  it  [  They  teach  that;.'.'  tbeMini- 
fieri  nor  people  ought  to  make  any  general  Formation,  with  face  anJarmef, 
or  othertvife  of  their  own  authority  change  any  larvs  made  or  (jljbltfhed  for 
Religion  by  Authority  gf  Parliament :  But  they  hold  that  the  general  Reforma- 
tion duth  belong  to  the  Magijirates  as  Gods  Lieutenant :  and  that  for  tbemfilvts 
they  may  and  ought  in  dutiful  fort  both  ?  reach  andlVrite,  and  fie  to  tin Ma- 
gijirates for  rcdrcjs  of  Enormities,  and  alp)  praUice  the  ordinances  of  Chri'i 
n  h'ich  he  hath  commanded  his    Church  to  kgcp  to  the  end  of  the  JForld. 

And  Article  2  c.  It  is  not  all  the  unprepared  Pari/h  that  they  would  I 
brouftpt  under  Difcipline:  but  thofe  of  each  Parijh  who  are  prepare  I  and  rvil». 
ling?] 

§  .8.  In  (hort  the  demonstration,  the  fupplication,  the  humbe  motion  to 
the  Council,  and  almoft  all  the  Nonconformists  writings  (hew,  that.  I. 
Their  great  Caufewas  to  fet  np  Parifh  Difcipline,  under  Superior  Syn- 
ods. 2.  Being  rhemfclves  almoft  aU  in  publick  Churches,  at  lead 
per  z/cf/,and  being  Oil]  in  hope  of  publick  reformation  .they  were  greatly  a- 
gainft  the  Brownifts  violence,  that  would  break  thofe  hopes.3.  They  held 
that  Chrifts  Law  was  thdr  Rule,  which  commanded  this  Difcipline, 
which  no  MagiOraie  could  difpenfe  with.  4.  Bu'  that  Magiftrates  mull 
be  obeyed  in  fuch  ordering  of  Church  matters  as  belong  to  them.  But 
not  in  forbearing  fuchexercife  of  the  Miniltry  as  was  needful  to  its  ends, 
the  Churches  good.     And^itsfaid,  they  practifed  accordingly, 

I.  The  Brownifts  denyed  the  truth  of  the  Parifh  Miniftry  and  Church* 
es,  and  the  lawfulnefs  ot  Communion  with  them.  1 1.  The  Semiiepara- 
tifts  held  it  lawful  to  hear  them  preach,  but  not  to  joyn  in  the  Liturgy 
and  Sacrament.     And  this  is  it  that   PhiU  Nye.  wrote  for. 

III.  The  Presbyterians  and  meer  Nor  confor  mills  thought  it  lawful, 
and  meet  in  thofe  Parishes  which  had  capable  Ministers ,  to  joyn  in  borh 
Liturgy  Sermons  and  Sacraments,  where  fin  was  notimpofed  on  then  . 
Butfo  ("as  though  forbidden  )  while  they  had  publick  Churches,  to  do 
their  bell  to  practice  Chrifts  Commands  and  Difcipline,  and  where  tf 
could  have  none  to  further  the  fame  ends  as  efTeclually  as  they  could, 
in  the  opportunities  left  them.     But  never  took  it  for  their  duty  to  lea 
all  their  Minitfry  or  publik  preaching  mccrlyin  obedienc  to  the  law 
much  lefs  to  the  Bifliops. 

When  all  this  is  fo  notorious,  and  when  I  knew  the  minds  of  many 
aged  Nonconforming  about  forty  years  agoe  as  my  familiar  friends, 
who  were  all  of  the  fame  mind  in  this  as  lam,  what  hiftory  can  I  be 
more  alTured  of,    than,  as  I  fa  id,   that  Firft,  They  took  not  praying 

F  3  publickiy 


[38] 

publlckly  and  gathering  AiTemblies  to  be  therefore  finful,  becaufe  it  wa-s 
forbidden  by  the  Law.  2.  But  to  be  a  fin  againil  Prudence  and  the 
ends  of  their;  Miniftry,  when  it  was  like  to  do  more  hurt  than  good, 
by  exafperating  the  Prince,  and  depriving  therrifelves  and  others  ot  bet- 
ter advantages  for  thofe  holy  ends*  3.  And  that  it  was  a  duty  when 
it  was  like  to  do  more  good  than  hurt:  4.  And  therefore  they  broke 
Laws  where  they  could  be  endured,  even  in  Chappells  and  Parifh  Church- 
es. 

§  5*  Andit  is  not  inconfiderable  that  the  reafons  why  Calvin,  Bui- 
linger^  Zanchy,  Beza,  faid  what  they  did  for  fubmiilive  forbearing  pub- 
lick  Preaching  and  Church  gathering,  wereFirft,  Becaufeas  they  faw 
that  the  Prince  was  refolved  not  tofurTerit,  fo  Reformation  was  then 
but  begun,  and  the  Prince  and  Magillrates  were  the  pricipal  means  of 
it,  and  they  had  great  hopes  that  what  could  not  be  done  at  prefent 
ro  perfect  it,  might  be  done  afterwards  at  a  fitter  time.  King  Fdward 
was  fain  to  quiet  the  feditious  Papiils  by  making  them  beleive  that 
Latin  and  Englifti,  was  the  great  difference  between  the  former  Mafs 
worfhip  and  the  Liturgy:  Aftertimes  had  no  fuch  ncceillty  :  and  tumul- 
tuoufly  todifturb  the  Magiftrate  in  his  prudent  progrefs  of  Reforming, 
had  been  to  ferve  the  enemies  of  Reformation. 

But  in  our  times  Parliaments  (who  the  Dodror  S,  faith,  are  in truffed 
fo  Confent  for  us  J  have  tbefe  fifty  years  told  the  Kingdom  that  theRe- 
formajion  was  growing  backwards,  and  (fit  increafe  of  Popery  by 
favour  and  publick  tolleration  defigr.ed,  and  much  accompliflicd  >  and 
Plots  threatned  the  restoring  of  it :  and  if  Parliaments  deceived  us,  yet 
the  chief  Aclorsthemfelves  were  to  be  believed  :  Doctor  Heylin  maketh 
the  fyncretifm  and  clofure  with  them  in  the  bofom  of  the  now  indul- 
gent Church,tobeArch-Bi(hop  Lands  very  laudable  deligns.  Arch-Biihop 
Browbal,  faith  Grotius,  was  to  have  held  fome  place  among  ls,  s$ 
a  Protectant ,  and  was  of  the  Englidi  Biftiops  mind,  and  hehimfelfdoth 
fay  the  lafH  and  I  have  (hewed  in  his  own  words  that  Grotius  took  Rome 
for  the  Miilrisof  all  Churhces  ,  and  that  there  was  no  way  for  the 
Union  of  Protectants ,  buttojoyn  in  Union  with  Rome,  and  that  he 
owned  the  Doclrine  of  the  Councils  even  of  Trent  it  felf,  requiring 
but  the  amending  of  the  Clergies  lives ',  and  the  calling  by  the  Schoolmen? 
bold  difputest  and  the  reflraint  of  the  Popes  Government  to  the  Rule  of 
the  Canons,  fecuring  the  rights  of  Kings  and  Bifbops,  and  this  he  faith  will 
content  the  peaceable:  Vincentius  wrote  a  book  called  Grotius  Papizans  > 
Saravius  in  his  Epiille  upon  ipeach  with  Grotius  laments  it  as  too  true: 
His  trie nd  Dion,  Petaviits  told  Mr.  Ereskjn  an  honourable  perfon  atten- 
dant 


[39] 

danton  the  King,  that  Grotius  refolved  to  have  declared  hirtifelf  for 
the  Church  of  forae,  if  he  had  returned  alive  from  the  joarny  that 
he  dyed  in.  See  Mr.  Tborndikes  juit  weights  ,  what  lie  was 
for. 

And  how  far  many  Doctors  of  this  Church,  fome  yet  living  ,  have 
maintained  that  Grotius  principles  are  not  Popery  ,  and  consequently 
what  fuch  mean  by  Popery  when  they  difclaim  it,  I  need  not  tell  you  , 
while  (b  many  of  them  have  published  it  in  print?  And  are  not  Mr. 
Tborndick*  termes  of  Concord  in  Councils  till  the  eight  hundredth  year 
much  like  and  much  more  in  book  aforefaid  ? 

And  furely  there  is  great  difference  between  fuch  Preachings  as  were 
like  to  be  the  ruin  of  the  begun  Reformation  by  exasperating  a  Reforming 
Maginrate  ,  and  fuch  Preaching  as  tendeth  to  flop  the  revolt  of  a  re- 
fonned  Nation,  when  Parliaments  and  the  Agents  themfelvcs  of  there- 
volt,  proclaim  the  danger. 

Its  true  that  there  was  then  a  greater  fcarcityof  Preachers  than  now  : 
And  that  wrasthe  Nonconforming  argument  with  the  Bifhops  when  they 
pleaded  for  publick  liberty ;  Eut  its  as  true  that  they  had  far  greater 
hopes  of  that  Liberty,  which  it  had  been  folly  to  caft  away,  for  lefs : 
But  it  is  not  io  with  us>  we  are  a  greater  number  than  they, 'and  have 
new  Laws  to  (hut  us  out  not  only  of  the  Churches,  but  of  Corporate 
ons,  and  Bifhops  that  will  give  us  no  fuch  liberty. 

§  6,  And  indeed  fo  many  were  the  unlearned  Parifh  Priefts,  and  fo 
bad,  in  Queen  Elizabeths  daies,  being  many  of  them  lately  filly  Mafs 
Priefls,  that  the  (hameof  the  Church  and  the  cry  of  the  Proteftant  peop- 
le forced  the  Bifhops  to  tolerate  moll  of  the  Nonconforming  in  fome 
publick  Church  ,  efpecially  thofethat  were  moderate  and  did  not  pub  - 
lickly  oppofe  them-  Dr.  Humphry  was  allowed  Reigus  ProfelTour  in 
Oxford  :  Dr.  John  Keignolds  Prefident  of  Corpus  Ch.  Col.  Mr-  Perkins , 
Ledturer  in  Cambridge  ,  Mr.  Paul  Bayne  after  him,  fo  Dr.  Chadeorton 
there^c  fome  tell  men  that  thefc  were  all  Conformiits,and  of  the  Church  i 
And  yet  I  am  none  that  am  of  the  fame  mind.  The  truth  is,  they  were 
for  fubmitting  to  kneeling  at  the  Sacrament,  Surplice  and  moffof  the 
Liturgy,  rather  than  ceafe  Preaching:  Eutthey  were  againft  fubfeription, 
and  theEnglim  fort  ofDiocefan  EiQiopsand  Government,  and  the  im- 
pofedufeot  thcCrofs,  as  it  is  in  Baptifm  ;  As  Tradition  tells  us,  and 
you  may  partly  fee  in  Dr.  Reynolds  Letter  to  Sir  Francis  Knowles ,  in 
Mr.  Baynes,  Diocefans  Tryal,  his  Letters,  and  in  Fuller  and  other  Hi- 
{Tories,  And  Mr.  Veering,  Mr.  Greenham,  Mr.  John  Fox,  Mr.  Marbury, 
Dudley,  Fewer,  Mr.  Knewflubs,  yea  I  think  fix  or  ten  to  one  ,  were  en- 
dured 


C4ol 

du'redin  publick  Churches  long,  before  they  were  hindered  i  And  when 
they  were  hindered  ,  they  fpake  peaceablely  and  intreatingly ,  and 
were  ftill  in  hope  of  publick  Liberty,  and  were  oft  petitioning  or  mak- 
ing great  Friends  to  the  Bifhops  to  that  end  much  they  long  obtained 
a*)d  more  they  hoped  for.  How  long  Mr.  Gravers  was  kept  in  at  the 
Temple,  is  commonly  known. 

§  7.  It  is  neither  conliftent  with  my  leifurc,  nor  the  bufinefs  now 
in  hand,norIfuppofethe  patience  of  moft  readers,  that  I  fhould  prove 
this  further  by  a  Voluminous  tranferibing  Hiftorics  already  extant.  If 
the  Book  which  Dr.  St.  citeth  called  part  of  a  Regifier  be  perufed,  he 
will  rind,  1.  That  the  pafTage  cited  by  the  D.  was  the  reprehenlion  of 
many  Londoners  taken  at  a  meeting  in  an  open  Hall  of  a  Company,  which 
meeting  they  avowed  :  Is  this  a  proof  that  they  were  againft  fuch 
publick  meetings,  or  for  it  ?  When  for  it  they  lay  in    many  Prifons; 

2.  That  they  profelTed  that  they  forfook  not  the  Publick  Churches, 
till  their  Teachers  were  filenced  and  turned  out;  So  little  doth  (iiencing 
tend  to  union. 

3.  That  yet  thefe  being  ordinary  Citizens,  fpake  many  things  weak* 
ly  ,  crying  out  too  ralhly  of  the  Rags  and  Ceremonies  of  Antichrift: 
But  he  might  have  found  many  things  in  the  Regifier  more  worthy  his 
communication:     For  inftance. 

1.  The  LetterofDr.  Wy:  In  the  beginning.  2.  Dr.  Tilkington  (after 
Eifhop  of  Durhxm)  his  Letter  or  weighty  reafons  again  ft  tilencing  the 
Nonconformifts.  3.  Mr.  Edward  Veerings  arifwer  to  the  Articles  put  to 
him,  twice :  with  fober  and  Peaceable  words.  4,  Mr.  Greenbams  modeft 
and  peaceable  Apology  to  the  Bilhop  of  E/i,  againft  Conformity,  yet  re- 
filling to  give  his  Reafons ,  left  they  mould  provoke  till  he  were  con- 
ftreined  fas  I  did  feventeen  years  J.  All  which  (hew  that  the  Non- 
conformifts  then  were  moftlyin  pofkiTion  of  fome  publick  Churches,  or 
but  newly  turned  out  ,  and  in  hope  of  reftauration.  And  what  is  all 
this  to  our  cafe  of  total  and  peremptory  exclufion  ? 

§8.  Andmethinks  the  Dodtorlhould  notdefifre  to  tempt  the  Reader 
that  tryeth  his  citations  to  read  the  reft  of  that  Regifter :  viz.  1  The 
harfti  ufage  of  Mr.  Johnfon^  who  dyed  in  prifon,  driven  into  too  (harp 
Language  by  their  ufage.  2.  The  exceptions  of  Mr.  Crane.  3.  The  Mi- 
nifters  complaint  to  the  Councils  v  4»  Efpecially  the  Councils  Letter  to  the 
Jufticeson  the  bebalfof  the  Minifters,  worthy  to  be  perufed  at  this  time. 
5  A  notable  Treatife  called  a  Lettertoa  Londoner,  againft  the  Lega- 
lity of  the  B;mops  proceedings.  6.  The  Comons  complaint  for  a  Learned 
Miniftry,  (hewing  what  a  (hameful  fort  of  men  wer*kept  in  by  the  bifhops, 

white 


DM] 

while  the  ^5o  neon  for  mi  ft  s  were  turned  out  and  filcnced.  7.  Tie  pra<frif- 
esof  the  Prelates.  8.  The  Petition  to  the  Queen  and  that  to  the  Con- 
vocation, p.  Mr.  Marburys  conference  with  the  Bifhop  of  London,  and 
his  Arch-Deacon.  How  the  Bifhop  railed  and  fworc  at  him,  and  reviled 
hirofordefiring  that  all  PariChes  (hould  have  Preachers,  as  if  Homily  Pvea- 
ders  were  not  enough.  And  yet  Mr.  Marbury  was  fo  moderate  that  at  laft 
with  liberty  of  interpretation  ("like  Cbillingrvortbs  )  he  conformed.  10. 
Mr.  Dudley  Fenners  defence  ot  theMinifters  againft  Dr.  Er/Wgej  ilanders : 
Written  but  a  month  before  his  dea;h,  whereas  theiaid  Fenner  was  far 
from  unlearned  fas  his  Methodical  7  beohgia  (hews)  and  was  fo  moderate 
that  Dr.  Ames  faith  he  much  conformed  at  laft  5  but  it  feems  not  enough  : 
and  he  meweth  how  the  Bifhops  fet  themteves  againft  fuch  Preachers.  1 1 
Mr.  Gawtons  troubles.  12.  Dudley  Fenners  Counter-poyfon  ,  or  certain 
form  of  Ecclef.  Government  and  itsdefence.  13.  The  demonftration  of 
of  difcipline.  Doth  the  Dr.  believe  indeed  that  thefe  writings  fignirie  that 
the  Nonconformfts  of  thofe  times  thought  it  a  fin  to  Preach  eo  nomine  be- 
caufe  forbidden? 

§p.  They  wrote  indeed  a  great  deal  more  againft  feparation  than  heck- 
eth ,  and  more  than  all  the  Conformifts  did.  And  yet  they  were  not  more 
againft  it  than  Bifhop  Bilfon^  who  faith,  If  the  Magiftrate  forbid  us  our  rvor\ 
xve  muft  go  on>  and  patiently  feffer.  Mr.  Hilderjham  was  called  Malleus 
Scbifinaticorum,  and  yet  he  and  I  are  Schifmaticks  with  theft  men:  Mr. 
John  Fagets  Arrow  againft  reparation,  Mr.  Bradjharv,  Mr.>  Gifford,  Mr. 
B*//,  &cm  have  faid  enough,  Eut  he  that  knoweth  their  controverfie 
knoweththat  it  was  none  of  the  queition.  whether  k  be  lawful  to  Preach 
when  the  Magiftrate  forbids  it,  or  whether  our  Parifh  Churches  and 
Dioccfan  bz  to  beprefered  before  more  Reformed  Churches  when  they 
may  be  had  ?  But  whether.  1 .  The  Parifh  Churches  be  no  true  Churches  ? 
2.  Or  fuch  as  it  is  unlawful  to  communicate  with  occasionally  ?  3.  Or 
conliantly  when  no  better  can  be  had  without  greater  hurt  than  bene- 
fit ?  4«  Whether  it  be  a  duty  to  gather  Churches  or  Preach  publickly 
when  it  is  like  to  do  more  hurt  than  good,  by  the  Magiftrates  op- 
pofltion  }  5.  Whether  we  (hould  not  quietly  bear  with  that  in  a  Church 
which  we  cannot  reforme,  while  no  fin  is  put  on  us,  and  the  Communi- 
on of  it  is  no  worfe  than  that  of  our  Parifh  Churches  ?  In  all  thefe  they 
were  againft  the  feparatih's^  and  foam  I.  6,  Yea  they  pleaded  the  duty 
of  obeying  the  Magiftrate  by  forbearing  to  Preach  when  their  Preaching 
was  not  neceffary  :  And  fo  do  I. 

§  10.  One  would  think  they  that  take  Homilies  for  Sermons,  fhould 
confefs  that  the  Nonconfoimlis  writing  againit  the  prohibition  of  the 

G  Law, 


E.40 

Law,  was  a  Preaching,  or  much  more:  as  it  is  more  publick.  And 
did  the  Nonconforming  write  tvben  forbidden,  Co  much  as  Cartrvrigbt, 
Parker,  Sandford ,  Fenner  .  Gilby,  Ames  ,  and  aboundance  more  have 
done,  yea  and  writ  againit  Diocefanes  and  Conformity  as  thefe  and 
Braafhaw ,  Nichols,  Erigbtman ,  Rzyne ,  7rav?rs ,  and  aboundance  more 
have ,  even  many  hundreds,  as  the  Millinary  Petition  and  the  Coun- 
try Complaints  &c.  (hew  >  and  yet  did  thefe  men  every  one  of  them 
take  it  for  fin  to  Preach ,  becaufe  it  was  difobedience  I  But  nothing  will 
convince  fome  men. 

§  ii.  But  I  appeal  to  the  reafon  and  humanity  of  mankind,  into  what 
hands  the  filenced  and  perfecuted  Minifkrs  are  fallen?  Is  it  humane 
firft  to  charge  them  with  refifting  the  Laws,  by  Preaching,  gathering 
Churches,  and  adminiftring  Sacraments,  and  making  Canons  and  fetting 
up  new  Difciplinc,  and  to  publifti  this  to  the  land  and  world  by  fuch  Au- 
thority as  Arch  BiGiop  Bancrofts,  Doctor  Heylins  &c.  till  it  is  become  their 
CommonCharge  to  render  them  fufpecled  and  odious,and  till  this  be  taken 
for  undoubted  truth  :  And  yet  when  it  may  ferve  for  the  lllencing  of  usv 
to  maintain  it  with  Z>r.  St.  as  that  which  he  is  certain  of,  that tbe  old  Noncon- 
for  tnijls  were  againft  fuch  Preaching  and  aiFembling-  At  this  rate  we 
have  been  hitherto  accufed  and  confuted. 

Yea  upon  the  forefaid  Accufations  their  Canons  were  formed  againft 
the  Nonconfcrmifts,  forbidding  their  AiTembling,  Preaching,  calling 
themfelvesa  diftincl:  Church,  and  a  great  deal  more  fuch  :  and  yet  now 
the  men  that  conform  to  thefe  Canons  are  certain  that  they  were  made  up. 
on  fafe  fuppolitions,  and  not  one  of  the  Nonconformifts  were  fo  guil- 
ty. 

But  doth  not  the  Doctor  thus  grievoufly  accufe  the  Church  which  he 
would  defend.?  Were  they  fuch  men  i.  that  would  fo  falfly  accufe  the 
Innocent  2.  and  ufe  themfo  cruelly  on  fuch  falfe  accufations,  many  of 
them  dying  in  Prifons,  and  many  lay  there  long  &c.  j.  and  to  form 
Canons  on  fuch  falfe  fuppofitions  > 

$  i?.  Andldonot  think  I  (hall  prevail  with  him  to  tell  me,  whether 
he  that  thinks  theirCafe  and  ours  was  fo  much  thefame,doth  verily  believe 
f.  That  if  they  had  been  in  the  Plague  at  London,  and  feen  theforfaken 
people  crowding  for  inftru&ion  to  prepare  for  death,  the  Nonconfor- 
mists (  fuch  as  Brad(hau>,  Gifford,  Hilderjham,  Greenbam,  &c.  J.  would 
have  refufed  to  Preach  to  them. 

2.  And  if  the  next  year  they  had  feen  the  Churches  burnt,  and  the 
City  in  ruins,  and  few  Parilh  Minifters  officiate,  they  would  have  thought 
it  a  fin  to  Preach  to  the  dcfolate  City,    to  afTernble  them  to  worfhip 

God» 


C433 
God,    and  would  have  let  them  under  lb  dreadful  judgements,   live 
and  dye  like  prophane  Atheiils  ? 

3.  And  if  fhortly  after  the  King  had  Licenfed  them  to  aiTtmblcand 
Preach,  would  they  have  refund  it  as  a  fin  ? 

4.  And  if  the  Prelates  had  prevailed  by  fuch  a  Parliament  againft 
the  Kings  Licenfe,  and  he  fiill  had  (hewed  the  clemencie  of  his  mind 
by  his  conivence ,  and  Magiiirates  were  loth  to  execute  the  rigorous 
Laws,  and  people  would  not  inform,  and  the  informers  repented,  and 
thoufands  more  called  to  the  Nonconforming  for  help  ,  than  did  there 
when  Popery  ftuck  ftill  in  the  peoples  hearts  >  would  they  have 
thought  all  this  no  alteration  of  the  Cafe,  to  judge  whether  their  Preach- 
ing would  do  good  or  hurt  i 

§13.  He  tells  us  of  the  fewnefsof  Nonconforming  in  King  Edward's 
days.  And  it  is  a  wonder  that  fo  many  in  fo  fhort  a  time,  went  lb 
far  in  the  Reformation  as  they  did.  But  fo  faft  were  they  then  in  pro- 
grefs,  that  even  the  Reformation  of  Church  Laws  then  by  the  Com- 
miflioners  agreed  on  was  in  many  things  fo  much  better  than  our 
Canons,  as  could  we  now  but  obtain  the  fame,  would  go  far  to 
heal  us.  Let  me  infiance  in  fome,  and  anticipate  by  it  my  anfwer 
to  his  after  difcourfe  againft  Par i(h  Difcipline. 

1.  Cap.  18.  de  Hcref.  They  determine  of  the  Salvation  of  the  un- 
bapmed  Infants  of  believers,  the  contempt  only  being  damning. 

2.  They  define  the  Church  vifible  (  Cap  22,  J  to  be  tht  Congrega- 
tion of  all  believers  in  which  the  Sacred  Scripture  is  fincercly  taught ,  and 
the  Sacraments  (  at  leafi  in  the  neceffary  parts  )  adminijired  according  tj 
Clmfls  inflitutiou^But  your  Canons  deny  all  fuch  here  to  be  true  Church- 
es, fave  theirs,  as  fettled  by  Law. 

3.  De  Sacram.  Cap,  5.  None  to  he  admitted  to  the  Sacrament  till  in 
the  Church  he  have  profeffed  his  faith.  And  de  Div.  Oir.  Cap.  7  They 
that  will  receive  the  Communion  muft  the  day  before  come  fo  the  Miuijter 
that  he  may  have  time  to  excujfe  their  Confciences^  and  deal  with  them  if 
they  have  done  any  thing  ungodly  or  fuperjiitioufly^  in  which  tlje  Churc  1  is 
offended  >  and  alfe  may  try  their  faiih^  that  fo  he  may  either  correct  U 
ignorancz^  or  terrifie  their  Contumely,  or  confirm  their  doubting.  For  none 
ought  to  he  admitted  to  the  Holy  table  of  the  Lord ,  that  hath  not  a  per- 
fect belief"]  The  words  need  a  gentle  expolition  :  but  we  have  no 
power  now  to  try  mens  knowledge  or  belief  thus. 

4.  Cap.   10.    After  evening  prayers  ,    the  Farifh  Uinifhr  Deacon  and  EL 
ders  with  the  people  ,  jhall  call  thofe  that  have  been  publicly  perverfe,   and 

Scandalous   to   confejs    their  fins ,    and  to  be  publicity  cor  retted  7    that  the 

g  z  a 


[443 

Church  may  be  conformed  by  their  whole fome  correction.  And  the  Mini- 
jier  and  Deacon  with  fome  Elders  fhall  confult  how  the  reft  that  are  of 
vitious  lives,  may  firft  by  brotherly  love  according  to  Chrifts  prefcript  in 
the  Gofpel,    be  dealt  with  by  fiber  mens    who fe  admonitions  if  they  receive, 

they  Jhzll  give  God    tbankj :    But  if  they  go  on  in  the  Crime ,    thiy  flull 

bejharply  punifljed  as  the  Gojpel  prefcribeth.  ] 

5.  De  Condon.    Cap.    3.     Preachers  Jhall  name  no  guilty  perfon  before 

the  multitude,   unlefs  fuch  as  have  contemned  Ecclefiaftical  Admonitions  ~]  fuch 

m?y  be  named. 

64    De   E  xc.    Excommunication  for  none  but   horrible  Crimes ,  &c  Cap* 

4.   and  after  oft  admonition.    But  you  Excomunicate  all  Godly  men 

that  do   but  fay    your  Conformity    is  not  lawful,     ipfo  faclo  by  your 

Canon. 

7.  Cap.  6.  \  We  permit  not  the  power  of  Excomunication  to  be 
in  any  one  perfon:  'Though  the  confent  of  the  wh  le  Church  be  fpeciaU 
ly  difirahle ,  yet  becaufe  it  is  hard  to  gather  and  takg  it ,  let  Excom- 
munication thus  proceed  ,  that  the  Arch-Bifhop ,  Bifhop,  or  other  law* 
ful  Ecclefiajiical  Judge ,  call  ont  Justice  of  peace ,  and  the  Minifier  of 
the  place  where  the  guilty  perfon  dwelleth  ,  &r  his  deputy  ,  and  two  or  three 
otlyer  Learned  and  well  manured  Presbyters,  in  whofe  prefence ,  when  the 
matter  hath  been  moft  diligently  handled  aud  gravely  weighed,  the 
(intenct  or     Excommunication    fhall    pafs.      Cap.      7.      And    be   writ- 

Cap.  16  There  is  written  a  large  pious  form  like  a  Sermon 
to  be  ufed  at  the  Reconciling  of  the  penitent ,  and  his  form  of  con- 
teffion  ,  and  petition  to  be  received  ,  and  then  the  Paftor  of  dm 
Chuich  is  to  ask  all  the  flock,  whether  they  w;l!  forgive  the  offender  and 
pray  for  bim>  and  whether  they  will  have  him  received  into  their  Congregation 
as  a  brother.  And  then  the  Paftor  is  to  exhort  the  penitent,  and  then  abfolve 
him  (  A  great  andfolemn  work,  moft  unlike  your  Difcipline  ).  And  then 
to  give  God  tbankj  and  pray  for  him  and  the  Church. 

Should  we  now  but  move  for  thus  much  in  order  to  concord 
with  the  Cconformifts,  we  have  reafon  to  think  no  importunity 
could  prevail  for  it  i  were  the  confequents  of  our  diviiion  as  de- 
nial as  they  are  now  by  moft  proclaimed.  -  Yet  verily  we  are 
moft  unexcufeable  wretches  ,  if  we  have  learned  no  more  to  this 
day  than  they  did  in  fo  few  years  5  or  under  full  power  and 
opportunity  will  refift  that  good,  which  they  that  wanted  fuch 
opportunity  wifred  for  >  and  go  back  as  fa(i  as  they  went  for- 
ward. 

§  14. 


[49] 

Sett.  14.  To  p.  8.  £1  never  faid  that  the  troubles  at  Franhford  were 
Fo  much  about  free  or  formal  Prayer  ,  as  that  the  Presbyterians  rtfufcd  all 
forms.] 

Sett.  15.  />.  19.  He  confelTeth  that  [_Whittingham^  Sampfon,  Gdby  and 
Others.,  accepted  of  preferment  and  employment  in  the  Church,  the  Btjhop  flaw- 
ing them  kwdnefi for  their  forward  zealous  Preaching',  3  and  this  being  with- 
out their  fubfcribing  to  conform,  is  it  any  wonder  then  that  they  ga- 
thered not  Aflemblies  elfewhere  f  Had  the  Bifhops  fo  tryed  us,  we  (hould 
never  have  put  them  to  talk  fo  of  our  feparation,  (but  might  have  done 
our  bell:  to  build  more  Churches.)  Doth  none  of  all  this  difference  their 
cafe  and  ours? 

Sett.  16.  p.  20.  He  confelTeth  when  [.they  were  flcnced,  they  began  to 
have  fepar ate  Meetings,]  and  yet  were  all  the  old  Non-Conformiits  againlt 
fuch. 

Sett.  17.  As  to  Beta's  Letter,  have  not  I  faid  more  againil  Separation 
than  he  doth  i  Doth  the  Dr.  think  the  Reader  fo  blind  as  not  to  fee  that 
Beta's  words  are  juft  of  the  fame  importance  with  the  account  I  gave, 
and  contrary  to  his,  trie  \_He  trembleth  at  the  thoughts  of  their  exercifing 
their  funtt  ion  again(tthe  will  of  the  Qneen  andBifiops,  for  fuch  reafons  as  may 
be  eafily  underftood,  though  we  fay  never  a  word  of  them :  ]  Its  eafie  indeed  to 
fee  what  he  trembles  at,  and  why  he  named  them  not,  which  he  wTould 
fure  in  charity  have  done,  had  it  been  becaufe  it  is  finful  difobedience  to 
preach  when  forbidden :  It  was  eafie  to  fee  what  hurt  it  would  have  done 
in  the  ruine  of  Preachers  and  hearers,  and  (baking  all  the  begun  Refor- 
mation :  Its  not  fo  with  us ,  Gualter  and  Zanchy  fay  not  fo  much  againil 
Separation  as  I  do,  nor  John  Foxy  nor  Bullinger  whom  he  citeth ;  we  fay 
the  fame. 

Sett.  18.  Thefamel  fay  of  Parker  and  Gifford,  and  I  again  tell  him  that 
he  may  name  many  more ;  Hilderfiam,  Paget,  Ame,  &c.  I  am  of  their  judg- 
ment in  their  oppofition  to  the  Brownifts ;  but  it  is  a  notorious  untruth 
(pag.3  3.  J  that  the  force  of all  the  Non-Conformifts  reafonings  tgainft  Separation, 
lay  in  two  Suppofitions.  I .  That  nothing  could  juftifie  Separation  from  our 
Churchy  but  fuch  corruption*  which  overthrew  the  being  and  con ft 'it ut ion  of  it ; 
&c.  And  1 .  It  mull:  be  remembred  that  Separation  being  a  word  of  very 
many  fences,they  held  indeed  that  [  none  ought  to  fepar ate  from  a  Church  ac- 
cufvng  it  to  he  none,  but  for  that  which  proved  it  to  be  none.  ]  2.  But  did  they 
deny  that  which  all  the  Chriftian  World  confelTeth  fvix,.  1.  What  if  cur 
Englifh  Divines  gathered  by  Bifhop  Hall  againft;  Burtony  be  in  the  right, 
that  the  Church  of  Rome  tf  a  true  Church,  as  a  Thief  is  a  trUe  man,  (though 
I  think  otherwifej  mull  not  fuch  Bilhops  or  Conformilts  therefore  fepa- 
rate  from  them  *  H  2.  What 


2.  What  if  a  Church  impofe  fome  Lye,  falfe  Oath,  or  Subfcription, 
or  fome  actual  Sin  in  Worfhip,  as  a  condition  fine  qua  non  of  her  Commu- 
nion ;  is  it  not  lawful  to  feparate  into  better  AfTemblies ,? 

3.  What  if  they  put  down  all  preaching  fave  reading  fome  dry  Homi- 
lies, and  all  Difcipline,  is  it  not  lawful  elfewhere  to  ferve  God  better  ? 
But  of  this  more  after  where  he  repeateth  it.  The  Brownifts  cafe  was  quite 
other  before  defcribed. 

ScEt.  19.  to/?.  36,  37.  We  alfo  hold  that  whofoever  feparateth  from 
the  Church  of  England,  1.  As  having  not  that  Preaching  and  Sacraments 
which  are  of  neceffity  to  Salvation.  2.  Or  as  not  profelfing  true  faving 
Faith,  doth  by  confequence  feparate  from  all  Churches  in  the  world  >  be- 
caufe  they  have  all  the  fame  Word,  Sacraments,  and  Chriftian  Faith.  And 
to  this  Mr.  Jacobs  Argument  is  good,  p.  3  8 ;  ( though  he  was  the  man  that 
anfwered  Downams  Sermon  for  Bifhops,  and  efteemed  one  of  the  firft  In- 
dependents.*) And  Mr.  Balls  words  to  the  fame  purpofe,  and  the  fecond 
Suppofition  p:  ^p.  we  grant,  and  think  verily  that  the  late  Conformifts 
have  faid  more  againft  the  truth  of  the  Church  of  England,  than  we ;  yea, 
that  we  are  the  defenders  of  it  againft  the  Brownifts  and  them,  Ball^Btad- 
Jhaw,  afford,  Hilderfiam,  &c<  cited  by  him,  defend  it  as  we  do,  and  bet- 
ter than  fuch  as  Dr.  Heylin,  Thomdike,  Mr.  Dodwel,  and  fuch  others.  Did 
he  think  any  of  this  concerned  me? 

Seft.  20.  Yes,  for  />.  74.  he  faith,  [_  We  would  blind  the  Reader  by  finding 
cm  the  difparity.  of  fome  Circumfiances  •,  but  not  one  of  us  can  deny  that  it  was 
their  judgment,  that  the  holding  feparate  Congregations  for  worfiipy  where  there 
was  an  agreement  in  Doclrine  and  the  fuhfi  antiais  of "Religion ,  was  unlawful  and 
fchifmatical.  ~] 

Anfw.  Its  pity  fo  feeing  a  Dr.  fhould  tempt  men  to  be  fo  blind,  1 .  As  to 
think  all  the  differences  which  I  have  named,  inconfiderable.  2.  And  to 
goon  to  abufe  themfelves  and  others,  with  the  ambiguous  word  [  Sepa- 
rate ]  no  better  explained.  3.  And  to  think  the  other  caufes  before  and 
after  named  of  fome  fort  of  Separation,  to  be  inefficient-  andlamfor- 
ry  for  the  Dr.  if  this  be  his  own  Profefllon,  that  he  would  tell  any  lie,  or 
commit  any  other  fin,  or  for  fake  any  other  part  of  Religion,  ratherthan 
feparate  to  other  Ailemblies,from  a  Church  that  agreed  in  Doclrine  and 
the  fubftantials  of  Worfhip  with  him.  The  Presbyterians  then  are  fure 
of  him,if  they  were  but  inpoffeflion  *,and  it  feems  in  Mofcovy'he  would  for- 
iLke  preaching.  But  what  if  the  King  licenfed  a  preaching  Church,  would 
he  refute  the  ufe  of  it  for  fear  of  feparating  from  a  mere  reading  Church. 

This  Protean  word  [  feparate  ]  ferveth  for  many  ufes  :  I  will  put  one 
cafe  more  to  the  Dr.  (not  feigned.)    A  Conformift  Gentleman  was  of 

the 


Cr>] 

the  opinion  that  his  Parifh  Church  was  no  true  Church,  becaufe  the  Vicar 
was  a  Socinian,  and  another  becaufe  theParfon  was  ignorant  of  the  efTen- 
tials  of  Chriftianity  j  and  they  go  to  tht  next  Parifh  Church.  A  Non- 
conformift  in  the  fame  Parifh,  goeth  to  a  Nonconformifts  Chappel,  but 
doth  not  acaife  the  Parifh  Church  as  none,  as  the  other  do  ;  which  of 
thefe  feparateth  more  .'  At  Glcucefter  one  took  the  Diocefan  Church  for 
no  true  Church,  becaufe  Bifhop  Goodman  was  a  Papift,  and  the  Bifhop 
is  a  conftitutive  part,  and  yet  this  man  was  for  Diocefans:  A  Noncon- 
forming went  to  a  Nonconformifts  Church,  but  would  not  fay  the  Diocefan 
Church  was  none :  Which  feparated  more  f  He  feparateth  from  his  Parifh 
Church  againft  the  Canon,  who  goeth  from  an  ignorant  fcandalous  Rea- 
der, to  communicate  with  a  Preacher  at  the  next  Parifh :  He  feparateth 
from  the  Parifh  Churches,  who  judgeth  them  true  Churches,  but  having 
the  Kings  Licenfe,  joyneth  conftantly  with  the  French,  Dutch,  or  Non- 
conformifts as  better,  Ml  owning  mental  communion  where  he  hath  not 
localjand  he  feparateth  from  the  French,Dutch,or  Nonconformift  Church- 
es, who  thus  leaveth  them  (as  true  Churches)  to  joyn  with  the  Church  of 
£»g/Wasbetter.Many  and  various  are  the  forts  and  degrees  of  Separation, 
and  not  all  lawful  or  all  unlawful:  None  of  thefe  are  theBrownifls  fepara- 
tion,which  the  old  Nonconformifts  confuted  ^  which  confuted  in  a  denial, 
i.  That  the  EnglifliMinifters  were  true  Minifters.  2.  And  their  Churches 
true  Churches.  ^.Or  fuch  as  a  Chriftian  might  lawfully  live  in  communion 
with  in  ordinary  worfhip.  4.  And  therefore  they  were  all  bound  to  re- 
nounce them,  andfet  up  others. 

I  doubt  the  Dr.  is  far  more  a  Separatift  than  I,  and  fuch  as  I  \  for  I  am  for 
Communion  with  all  Chriftians,  as  far  as  they  feparate  not  from  Chrift^ 
and  I  hate  the  falfe  accufing  of  any  Church  as  if  it  were  none,  or  its  Com- 
munion unlawful.  I  can  be  but  in  one  place  at  once,  but  in  heart  I  joyn 
with  all  Chriftians  on  earth  except  in  fin  \  and  locally  I  joyn  where  1  fee 
greateft  reafon  for  it,  preferring  that  which  I  judge  meft  agreeable  to 
Gods  word,  fo  far  as  1  may  without  greater  hurt.  But  the  Canonical 
Conformifts,  unchurch  all  the  Churches  here  but  their  own,  and  utterly 
refufe  Communion  with  them,  even  with  thofe  that  refufe  not  Commu- 
nion with  them.  And  fome  think  that  forcible  filencing,  fining,  excom- 
municating, and  imprifoning,  is  not  the  gentlcft  fort  of  feparating. 

But  doth  he  in  all  his  Book  do  any  thing  to  fatisfie  any  mans  Confcience, 
that  would  know  from  what  Churches  he  may  or  may  not  feparate  ? 
Not  a  word  that  lean  find,  that  decideth  fuch  a  doubt.  His  two  words  here 
ufed  are  [_  Agreement  in  Doctrine,  and  fubflantials  of  Religion^  ~]  whereas 
1.  Religion  is  in  Acts  and  Habits ',  and  hath  no  proper  fttbfrance,  and  what 

H  2  his 


C&3 

his  term  \_fnbfiance  ]  meaneth,  till  he  tells  us,  none  can  know.  It  mufi: 
be  either  an  effential  part?  or  an  integral  part,  for  an  Accident  I  fuppofe  it 
is  not  If  only  an  ejfeniial  part,  what  Chriftian  dare  fay  that  I  may  fin 
againft  all  the  meer  integrals  of  Religion,rather  than  go  from  the  Church 
that  impofeth  fuch  fin  upon  me.  If  it  be  all  the  integrals  that  we  mnft 
agree  in,  then  we  differ  in  no  one  part  of  RtUgion  •,  for  Accidents  are  not 
farts :  And  then  who  eontradicts  him  t  When  men  differ  in  no  part  of 
Religion,  they  will  not  feparate  unlefs  merely  locally :  Are  all  the  things 
named  in  my  firft  Flea,  no  farts  of  Religion  ?  It  may  be  by  [  Subflance~] 
he  meaneth  only  the  greater  fort  of  Integrals ,  but  how  (hall  we  know 
where  to£x  our  meafures  5  what  duty  is  fo  fmall  that  I  may  omit  it,  or 
what  fin  fo  fmall  that  I  may  commit  it  for  Communion. 

2.  And  as  for  Dotlrine,  they  that  differ  in  any  part  of  Religion,  arc 
fuppofed  to  differ  in  the  doctrine  about  that  part.  But  can  any  man  tell 
what  Doctrine  it  is  that  he  maketh  our  agreement  in  to  be  necefTary,  or  the 
teft  of  Communion.  If  I  mould  feparate  from  all  Churches  from  which 
I  differ  in  any  the  lead  doctrine,  I  know  not  where  the  Diocefan  or  Na- 
tional Church  is  that  I  might  hold  Communion  with  :  Do  all  the  Con- 
forming agree  in  all  doctrines  ?  If  it  be  in  all  that  the  Law  impofeth,  how 
various,  mutable,  and  uncertain  is  that. 

I  diftinguifh  between  Dotlrine  profeffed  by  the  Chkrchy  and  Dotlrinc  im- 
posed on  me  to  profefs  it.  As  to  the  firft,  I  will  communicate  with  a  Church 
that  hath  twenty  falfe  Doctrines,  confident  with. the  effentials  of  Chri- 
ftianity  and  Church  Communion.  As  to  the  fecond ,  I  wiH  not  knowingly 
frofefs  one  falfe  Dotlrine  for  Communion  with  any  Church  on  Earth. 

Did  not  the  Nonconformists  differ  from  the  Conformifts,  in  the  Do- 
ftrine  of  thefufficiency  of  Scripture  for  regulating  Church-Order  and 
Worfhip ;  and  about  the  Divine  Right  of  Diocefan:  and  Elders,  and  about 
Pari(h  Discipline.  Do  not  we  now  differ  about  the  undoubted  certainty  of 
the  falvation  of  all  dying  baptised  Infants  ?  Will  this  warrant  a  feparation  ? 

Sett.  21.  f.  75.  He  tells  us  very  confidently  that  diver fity  of  circumfran- 
tlal  pretences  for  Separation,  alter  not  the  cafe :  But  1.  Its  true  that  if  twen- 
ty men  have  twenty  falfe  pretences  for  Separation,none  of  them  are  there- 
by juftified-,  but  if  one  man  have  a  juft  caufe,  it  juftifieth  him  ;  Inamed 
very  many  juft  and  unjuft  caufes  in  my  Plea,  and  he.giveth  noanfwer  to  it. 
2.  Are  they  fuch  circumflances  before  named :  Oaths,  Declarations,  Sub- 
fcriptions,  Doctrine,  &c  ?  3.  What  if  the  Lawfhould  change,  and  al- 
low of  various  Churches!*  what  if  the  King  Iicenfe  them. ?  Thefe  be  but 
circumflances:  What  if  the  Plague  drive  away  theParifh  Minifters  f  what 
if  the  Churches  be  burnt  and  the  people  forfaken  ?  will  no  fuch  circum- 
stances 


ftances  make  other  Aflemblies  lawful,  becaufe  he  calls  them  ferrate. 

Seel.  22.  p.  78.  His  undertaking  is  repeated :  [  He  is  certain  that  preach- 
ing in  off  0 fit  ion  to  our  eftablifijed  Laves,  is  contrary  to  the  Doctrine  of  all  the 
Nonconformifts  of  former  times.  ]  Anfw.  If  I  have  not  proved  the  contrary, 
I  cannot  prove  that  they  were  Engiifh  men. 

But  1.  he  proveth  that  they  were  all  of  that  mind,  by  citing  four  of 
their  Books  againft  Brownifts-,  and  were  four  or  forty  times  tour,  all? 
But  Mr.  Kathbands  is  faid  to  be  the  Nonconformifts.  Doth  he  believe  that 
he  meant  that  all  or  the  twentieth  part  of  the  Nonconformifts  wrote  or 
flbfcribed  it  *  One  of  the  Names  to  it  is  Mr.  Simeon  Jfi,  my  intimate 
dear  friend,  whofe  judgment  in  thefe  muterswas  the  fame  with  mine, 
whom  I  was  with  even  inhisficknefs  almoftto  the  Jaft  hour  of  his  Hfe.and 
was  buryed  Aug.  23.  1662.  the  day  before  the  Law  had  elfe  filenced  him , 
and  he  was  to  me  a  better  Expofitor  of  his  own  mind,  than  the  Dr.  can  . 
be :  He  was  fo  much  for  going  on  to  preach,  that  his  Motto  in  his  \-\\x&- 
va\Rlng\vas,ZlamnotaflLimedoftheGojpelofChnft:^\  I  yet  k:epmy  Ring, 
and  can  (hew  it  you. 

And  as  to  old  Mr.  Langky,  another  of  them,  I  heard  him  my  felf  preach 
in  Albriton  Church  in  Shropflnre,  aThankfgiving  Sermon  for  the  hopes  of 
deliverance  from  the  (ilencing  Bifhops,  when  the  Law  forbad  him :  And 
for  old  Mr.  Slater,  I  heard  him  preach  at  Trinity  Church  in  Coventry  when 
theLaw  forbad  him:  And  did  they  not  underftand  their  own  Writings 
better  than  the  Dr.  doth? 

Sftf.,23.  And  I  would  I  knew  how  to  prevail  with  him  to  tell  me,  whe- 
ther theLaw  and  Canon  did  not  forbid  all  the  Minifters  in  England  to  wor- 
fhip  God  according  to  the  Directory,  and  neglect  the  Common  Prayer 
Book,  which  yet  almoft  all  did  for  many  years  in  the  times  of  ufurpation: 
And  yet  of  nine  thoufand  or  more  of  thefe,  feven  thoufand  llnce  conform- 
ed to  the  Church  of  England,  and  they  lay  that  this  Dr.  is  one  of  them.  If 
mere  difobedience  then  be  the  fin,  all  thefe  lived  folong  in  fin,  and  he  with 
others. 

Sett.  24.  But  all  that  can  be  gathered  out  of  the  four  Books  cited  and  fuch 
others  is  but  this,  which  is  our  judgment :  1.  That  Churches  and  Pallors 
are  under  the  Kings  Government  as  well  as  other  Subjects.  2.  That  itbe- 
longeth  to  him  to  punifh  them  for  evil  doing,  and  encourage  them  in  doing 
well.  3.  That  as  to  this  his  own  execution,  he  is  the  publicK  Judge  whe- 
ther they  do  well  or  ill.  4.  That  i  f  he  juftly  forbid  any  to  preach  or  aflem- 
ble  he  muft  be  obeyed.  5.  And  if  he  miftake  in  particular  cafes,  not  de- 
ft roying  the  ends  of  his  Government,  the  common  good,  he  muft  not  be 
refilled,  nor  in  fuch  a  manner  difobeyed,  astendeth  more  to  the  common 

hurt 


[54] 

hurt  than  his  miftake  doth ,  nor  dilabfed  to  Govern  by  their  dishonour- 
ing him,  much  lefs  by  Rebellion  or  Confufion.  6.  Nor  are  men  bound 
to  caft  away  their  great  advantages  for  Gods  fervice  which  they  then  had, 
en  pretence  of  doing  better ■,  when  by  accident  it  would  do  more  hurt  than 
good,  nor  as  Bradjknv  faith  ,  to  run  on  the  Sword,  or  oppofe  Sword  to 
Sword,  or  raife  Sedition,  and  ruin  themfelves  in  vain. 

Their  advantages  were  many  :  i.  Lawful  Communion  in  the  Parifh 
Churches.  2.  Molt  of  them  either  conftantly  or  by  fits,  had  publick 
Churches  or  Chappels  to  preach  in,  and  were  ftill  in  hope.  3.  The  Ma- 
giftrate  protecled  them  and  the  Reformation.  4.  They  hoped  for  a  pro- 
grefs  of  it,  whereas  had  they  openly  done  as  the  Brownifts,  they  had  en- 
dangered the  Reformation  by  the  exafperation,  and  ruined  themfelves, 
and  loft  moft  of  their  labour  :  So  that  it  is  plain  that  preaching  in  that 
imprudent  manner  which  is  like  to  do  more  harm  than  good,  they  took 
to  be  a  double  fin,  as  hurtful  %&&  as  disobedience  *,  for  obedience  is  due  in 
fuch  a  cafe.  But  in  cafe  the  manner  and  circumftances  be  ftich  as  that  thefe 
evils  are  not  confequent,  but  more  good  than  hurt  to  be  expected  •,  they 
thought  the  bare  breach  of  the  Law  no  fin. 

Sett.  25.  Which  I  yet  further  prove,  1.  Becaufe  its  agreed  by  all,  that 
Governing  Order  is  a  medium  for  the  thing  ordered  *,  and  never  obligeth 
when  it  overthroweth  the  end,  power  being  given  to  Edification  and  not 
to  Deftruction :  None  have  power  to  forbid  theneceffary  preaching  of 
the  Gofpel,  and  probably  to  damn  Souls.  2.  Becaufe  elfe  the  Noncon- 
formifts  (hould  be  more  againft  preaching  when  forbidden  than  the  Con- 
formifts  •,  who  fay  as  Bifhop  Bilfon,  We  muft  go  on  with  our  work?  &  fuffer  .• 
and  as  Bifhop  Andrews  Tortur.Torti.  Cohibeat  Regem  Diaconus,  &c.  3.  Yea, 
shePapifts  who  on  pretence  of  Obedience  are  tyrannical,  yetmoftly  agree 
fas  I  have  elfewhere  proved)  that  humane  Laws  bind  not  beyond  the  cafe 
of  fcandal,  when  they  are  againft  the  common  good:  And  a  Toletane 
Council  decreed,  that  their  Conftitutions  fhould  not  be  taken  to  bind  ad 
peceatum,  fto  hazard  Souls)  but  only  adpeenam.  4.  As  I  have  faid,  their 
own  pradice  fully  expounded  their  words,  who  conftantly  broke  the  Law 
and  Canon  in  preaching  in  Houfes  and  in  Chappels  without,  or  contrary 
to  the  Liturgy,  or  a  part  of  it*  So  did  Mr.  Ball  at  Whitemore,  Mr.  Hind  t 
at  Banbury,  Mr.  Geree  and  Mr.  Fox  at  Tewkftury,  John  Rogers  at  Dedham, 
Mr. Taylor,  Mr.  Harvy,  Mr.  Bourne  at  Manchefter,  Mr.  Gee,  Mr.  Johnfon7 
Mr.  Hancock  Mr.  Barlow,  Mr.  Broxholme  ,  Mr.  Cooper ,  and  abundance 
more,  befides  thofe  mentioned  before. 

And  now  1  leave  it  to  the  Dr.'s  further  thoughts,  whether  he  fpake  tru- 
ly of  the  fence  of  All  theNonconfirmifts,  and  have  proved  what  he  under- 
took. 


[55] 

took.To  abufe  the  Magiftrate,  or  do  his  part  for  publick  Reformation, 
they  were  againft,  and  fo  are  we. 

Sett.  26.  As  to  his  queflion.  Was  there  Ufs  neceffuy  then  or  now  ?  I  anfwer, 
1. There  was  then  more  neceflity  as  there  is  of  you  or  me  in  America,  where 
we  cannot  preach ,  the  people,  lately  Papifts,  defired  not  their  helps,  nor 
fcrupled  hearing  others,  as  many  thoufands  do  now.2.There  was  neceffuy 
then  and  fo  there  is  now,  but  opportunity  mult  joyn  with  neceflity  to  oblige, 
which  they  had  more  than  we  by  connivence  in  Chappels,  where  was  ne- 
ceflity, and  they  had  lefs  than  we  in  other  places^ 

Sect.  27.  As  to  the  Anfwers  of  Mr.  Sprint,  on  my  knowledge  the  ufual 
anfwer  was,That  evil  mall  not  be  done  that  we  may  have  leave  to  do  good, 
and  that  if  others  hinder  me  becaufe  I  will  not  fin,  it  is  not  my  omiffion  of 
any  duty  •,  yet  the  disparity  of  the  Apoftlcs  cafe  and  ours,  may  be  menti- 
oned to  (hew  the  difference  of  obligations. 

Pofitive  Precepts  bind  not  ad  femper,  but  Negatives  do  *,  and  its  too 
grofs  a  fhift  to  turn  a  Negative  to  a  Pofitive,  and  then  pretend  that  the 
comparifon  is  between  two  duties :  preaching  is  a  duty  when  we  can  do  it, 
but  not  when  we  cannot  do  it,  unlefs  we  will  fwear,  fubferibe,  profefs,  or 
pradtife  a  forbidden  thing. 

Sett.  28.  I  conjecture  that  to  what  I  have  proved  of  the  practice  of  the 
Nonconform  ids,  it  will  be  faid  that  'their  preaching  in  peculiar  places , 
Chappels,  or  Churches,  though  in  a  manner  agai?ifi  Law  and  Canon,  was  but  a 
partial  joyning  with  the  Church  of  England,  and  not  afeparation  ;  and  the  conni- 
vence of  theBift  ops  was  a  kind  of  toleration. 

Anfw.  i.  And  is  not  my  cafe  the  fame?  We  had  more  than  connivence 
when  we  had  the  Kings  Licenfes,  and  ever  fince  experience  tells  you  that 
his  Clemency  hath  occafioned  a  reffraint  of  the  Bifhops,  and  fome  conni- 
vence from  them.  2.  And  if  it  were  the  Temples  that  make  the  differ- 
ence, let  them  allow  us  to  preach  there  and  fee  whether  we  will  rcfufe  it : 
And  fure  the  Conformifts  that  preach  in  Tabernacles  are  not  Separatifts ; 
the  Parifh  Teacher  of  St.  Martins  now  preacheth  in  the  fame  place  which 
1  built  to  have  preached  in,  and  for  fo  doing  was  by  a  warrant  judged  to 
prifon.  They  had  no  more  Law  on  their  tide  than  I  have,  they  ufually 
read  no  more  of  the  Liturgy  but  the  ConfelTion  and  the  Scriptures,  and 
many  not  the  firft  at  all,  and  fome  more  ,  fo  that  its  a  full  proof  that  if 
breaking  the  Law  had  been  all  their  flop,  they  would  have  ft  ill  preached. 

Se5i.2g.Dr.  Ames  tells  us  that  he  had  preached  without  the  Bifhops  con- 
fent  by  this  Story,  frejh  Suit,  p.  4c  9.  defcribingan  Englifh  Bifhops  Paftoral 
work,  hefaith.  "  It  would  be  ridiculous  for  a  mean  man  to  defire  Mm 
ccto  vifit  hkn,  his  Wife,  or  Children,  inficknefsj  he  mult  have  a  Chaplain 

"not 


"not  only  to  do  other  duties  of  Religion  for  him,  but  even  to  give  thanks 
" at  his  Table.  I  will  not  here  fpeakof  [draw  up  an  Excommunication  for 
ubim,  take  himPurfuivant,  fay  lor  fee  to  your  Prifoner  ',  ~\  but  note  one  ex- 
sample  of  mine  own  experience,  which  many  others  can  parallel  :  lwas 
"once  (and  but  once  1  thank  God)  before  a Bifhop,  and  being  prefented 
"to  him  by  the  chief  Magiftrates  of  a  Corporation,  to  be  Preacher  in  their 
"  Town  •,  the  lowly  man  firft  asked  them,  how  they  durft;  choofe  a  Preach- 
"er  without  his  confent :  Ycu  (faid  he)  are  to  receive  a  Preacher  that  I 
"  appoint  you,  for  I  am  your  Paftor,  though  he  never  fed  them :  And  then 
"turning  to  me,  [  How  durft  you,  faid  he,  Preach  in  my  Diocefs  with- 
out my  leave f  ]  So  that  without  any  other  reafon  but  meer  Lordfhip, 
"  the  whole  Corporation  and  1  were  difmhTed  to  wait  his  leifure,  which  I 
"  have  done  now  twenty  years  and  more. 

Much  like  the  ufage  of  holy  Paul  Bayne,  Succeflbr  to  Perkins,  who  be- 
ing commanded  to  preach  a  Vifitation  Sermon,  and  being  fickly  and  in  a 
fweat  with  preaching,  wasfaintorefrefhhimfelf  inftead  of  going  prefent- 
ly  to  attend  the  Bifhop  •,  and  when  he  was  fent  for,  having  fmall  Cuffs 
edged  with  a  little  blew  thred,  faith  the  Bifhop :  How  dare  you  appear  be- 
fore me  with  thoje  ?  and  hefufpended  him :  And  good  Mr. Bayne  would  never 
more  have  to  do  with  a  Bifhop,  but  laid,  They  are  an  earthly  Generation, 
and  favour  not  the  things  of  God. 

When  Dr. F/*/^  (ahalfConformift)  went  out  of  St.  Johns  Colledge  in 
Cambridge  with  his  Pupils,  hiring  Chambers  for  himfelf and  them  in  the  Town, 
it  was  as  great  a  feparation  from  the  Colledge  (to  avoid  the  Surplice  which 
he  after  fubmitted  to)  as  we  make  from  the  Church.  See  Ames  frejh  fuit, 
p.  473.  And  that  it  was  no  confcience  of  obeying  the  Bifhop,  that  Bez.a 
would  have  the  Minifters  moved  by,Jrom  affembling:  Judge  by  thefe 
words,  \_De  notis  Ecclef.  Ego  pontificiis — ]  "  I  willingly  leave  to  the 
"Papifts  the  whole  degree  of  Epifcopacy,  of  which  1  openly  fay,  the 
"Holy  Ghoft  was  not  the  Author,  but  humane  prudence;  which  if  we 
"obferve  not  that  God  hath  curfed,  certainly  we  even  yet  fee  nothing -7 
"  and  we  nouriih  a  viper  in  our  bofoms,  which  will  again  kill  the  Mother. 

Sett.  30.  I  will  conclude  with  the  recital  of  the  Letter  fent  to  the  Bifhops 
by  Dr.  Humphrey,  Regim  ProfefTor  in  Oxford,  who  yet  conftrained,  ufed 
the  Surplice  after  that;  Our  Dr.  may  note  what  fence  they  had  then  of 
thefe  things,  premifing  only  the  words  of  John  Fox,  fpeaking  of  Blumfield 
a  wicked  Perfecutor,  who  threatned  a  godly  man,  Simon  Harelfon,  for  not 
wearing  the  Surplice :  C  Its  pity,  faith  he,  fetch  baits  of  Popery  are  left  to  the 
enemies  to  take  Chriflians  in ',  God  take,  them  away  from  us,  or  mfrom  them :  for 
God  hnowcth  they  be  the  canfe  of  much  blindnefs  andflrife  among  men* 

Dr. 


ITrl 

Dr.  Humphrey's  Letter  to  the  B i s h o p s. 

"^7 Our  Lor dfiip  Letter  >  directed  unto  us  by  our  Vice-Chancellor,  a!- 
X  "  though  written  in  general  words,  yet  hath  fo  hearted  our  Ad  ver- 
"  faries,  that  we  are  now  no  more  counted  Brethren  and  Friends  but  Ene- 
"  mies  ^  and  fith  the  oJd  Mafs  attires  be  fo  ftraitly  commanded,  the  Mafs 
"  it  felf  is  (hortly  looked  for.  A  Sword  now  is  put  into  the  enemies  hands 
"  of  thefe  that  under  Q^Mary  have  drawn  it  for  Popery,and  under  pretence 
"of  good  order,  are  ready  without  caufe  to  bewreck  their  Popiih  anger 
"  upon  us,  who  in  this  will  ufe  extremity,  in  other  laws  of  more  impor- 
tance, partiality .1  would  have  wifhed,my  Lords,rather  privy  admonition 
"  than  open  expulfion  ■■>  yea  I  had  rather  have  received  wounds  of  my  Bro- 
"  ther ,  than  Rifles  of  mine  Enemy  ^  if  we  had  privily  in  a  convenient  day  re- 
"figned,  then  neither  fhould  the  punifher  have  been  noted  of  cruelty, 
"neither  the  offender  of  temerity,  neither  fhould  the  Papifts  have  accu  fed 
"fin  their  feditiousBook)  Proteftants  of  contention.  Religion  requireth 
" naked Chrift  to  be  preached,  profefTed, glorified \that gravioralcgti,  by 
"the  faithful Miniftry  of  feeding  Paftors,  fhould  be  furthered,  and  after 
"  that  orders  tending  to  edification,  and  not  to  deftrucl:ion,ad  vanced  j  and 
"finally  the  Spoufes  friends  (hould  by  all  means  be  cherifhed,  favoured, 
"and  defended,  and  not  by  counterfeit  and  falfe  intruders,  condemned 
"and  overborn,  and  defaced.  But  alas,  a  man  qualified  with  inward  gifts 
"  for  lack  of  outward  (hews  is  punifhed,  and  a  man  only  outwardly  confor- 
mable and  inwardly  clean  unfurnifhed,  is  let  alone,  yea  exalted:  The 
"  painful  Preacher  for  his  labour  is  beaten,  the  unpreaching  Prelate  offend- 
"  ing  in  the  greater,  is  (hotfree*,  the  learned  man  without  hiscapisafflift- 
"ed,  the  capped  man  without  learning  is  not  touched :  Is  not  this  direct 
"Iy  to  break  Gods  laws  ?  Is  not  this  the  Pharifes  va  f  Is  not  this  to  wafii 
"  the  outfide  of  the  Cup,  and  leave  the  inner  part  unclean  fed  ?  Is  not  this  to 
"  prefer  Mint  and  Annis  to  faith  aud  judgment  and  mercy  ?  Mans  tradition 
"  before  the-ordinance  of  God  ?  Is  not  this  in  the  School  of  Chrift,  and  in 
"  the  method  of  the  Gofpel  a  plain  diforder  ?  hath  not  this  prepofterous 
"  order  a  woe  f  That  the  Catechifm  fhould  be  read  is  the  word  of  God, 
1(it  is  the  order  of  the  Church,  to  preach  is  a  neceflary  point  of  aPrieft,  to 
"  make  quarterly  Sermons  is  law,  to  fee  poor  men  of  the  poor  mens  box  rc- 
cc  lieved,  Vagabonds  punifhed,  Parifhes  communicate,  Rood  lofts  puD'd 
"down,  Monuments  ofSuperftition  defaced,Service  done  and  heard,is  Scri- 
"  pture,  is  Statute  -7  that  the  Oath  to  the  C^  Majefty  should  be  offered  and 

I  taken, 


C58] 

<£taken,is  required  as  well  by  ordinance  of  God  as  of  man.  Thefe  are  plain 
"matters,  necefTary,  Chriftian,  and  profitable.To  wear  a  Surplice,  aCoap, 
"  or  a  corner'd  Cap  is  (as  you  take  it  J  an  accidental  thing,  a  device  only 
u  of  man,and  as  we  fay  a  doubt  or  queftion  in  divinity.  Sith  now  thefe  fub- 
"ftantial  points  are  in  all  places  of  this  Realm  almoft  negle&ed,  the  offen- 
"  der  either  nothing  or  little  rebuked,  and  fith  the  tranfgreiTors  have  no 
/'colour  of  confcience,it  is  fin  and  frame  to  proceed  againft  usfirft,  having 
<c  alio  reafonable  defence  of  our  doings:  Charity  my  Lords,would  firft  have 
ce  taught  us,Equity  would  firft  have  fpared  us,brotherlinefs  would  have  war- 
<cned  us,  pity  would  have  pardoned  us,  if  we  had  been  found  trefpatfers. 
£c  God  is  my  witncfs,who  is  the  beholder  of  all  faith,  1  think  of  your  Lord- 
"fhips  honourably  ,efteeming  you  as  brethren,reverencingyou  asLordsand 
c<  Mailers  of  the  Congregation :  alas  why  have  not  you  fome  good  opinion 
iCof  us?  why  do  you  truft  known  Adverfaries  and  miftruft  your  Brethren  ? 
ct  We  confefs  one  faith  of  Jefus, we  preach  one  dodrine,we  acknowledg  one 
ct  Ruler  upon  earth,in  all  things  (laving  in  this)  we  are  of  your  judgment, 
"(hall  webe  ufed  thus  for  aSurpIioe.?  (hall  brethren  perfecute  brethren 
<cfor  a  forked  Cap,devifed  fingularity  of  him  that  is  our  enemy  ?  Now  (hall 
iC  we  fight  for  the  Popes  coat^his  head  and  body  being  banifhed  ?  (hall  the 
"controverfie  fo  fall  out  inconclufion,  that  for  Jack  of  neceflary  furniture 
ct  (as  it  is  efteemedj  labourers  (hall  lack  wages  ?  Churches  preaching  ?  fhall 
<(  we  not  teach  ?  (hall  we  not  exercife  our  Talents  as  God  hath  commanded 
ci  uSjbecaufe  we  will  not  wear  that  which  our  jenemies  have  defired,and  that 
cl  by  the  appointment  of  Friends.Oh  that  ever  I  law  this  day  that  our  Adver- 
*  iaries  mould  laugh  to  fee  brethren  fall  together  by  the  ears:Oh  that  Ephra- 
u  im  mould  thus  eat  up  Mamffcs,  Maxaffes  Ephraim.  My  Lords,  before  this 
iC  take  place,confider  the  caule  of  the  Church,the  Crefts  and  triumphs  of  An- 
fy  tichrift,the  laughter  of  Satanjhe  forro w  and  fighs  of  a  number,t he  mifery 
V  and  fequel  of  the  Tragedy.l  write  with  zeal  without  proof  of  my  matter 
f  at  this  time  prefent,but  not  without  knowledg  of  it,nor  without  grief  of 
"  mind:  God  move  your  Spirit  at  this  prefent  to  fight  againftOww,  Gr- 
"  cumcifwnemjmmo  Conciftonem.£ga\X\$i  Lheram  &  Leqem^  which  principally 
<(  is  now  regarded  and  rewarded.Speak  I  humbly  befeech  you  to  the  Queens 
"  Majefty,  to  the  Chancellor,  and  to  Mr.  Secretary  and  the  reft,  that  thofe 
ic  proceedings  may  ileep,  that  Ezg/W  may  underftand  your  zealous  mind 
c<  toward  the  worlhipof  God,your  love  toward  the  poor  welwillers,  your 
t;  hate  toward  the  profefted  enemies,  your  unity  in  true  conformity,  the  o- 
u  ther  neither  be  needful  now,neit her  exacted  in  any  good  age  :  So  (hall  the 
"  little  Flock  be  bound  to  you,  fofliall  the  great  Shepherd  be  good  to  you. 

Chap 


[*?] 


An  Answer  to  the  falfe  Accusati- 
ons and  Reasonings  of  the  Dr/s 
Second  Part. 


HEre  the  Dr.  begins  with  the  defcription  of  their  principles 
whom  he  accufeth  (lam  one  of  them:)  And  the  firft  fort  are 
thofe  ["that  hold  partial  and  occafional  Communion  with 
"  our  Churches  to  be  lawful,  but  not  total  and  conftant,  ]  viz. 
'-  [at  fome  times  to  be  prefent,and  in  fome  part  of  our  worfliip,  and  on 
"  particular  occafion  to  partake  of  fome  ads  of  Communion  with  us*,  but 
€t  they  apprehend  greater  purity  and  edification  in  ieparate  Congregati- 
u  ons,  and  when  they  are  to  choofe  they  think  themfelves  bound  to  choofe 
"thefe,  though  at  certain  feafonsthey  may  think  it  lawful  to  fubmic  to 
u  occafional  Communion  with  our  Church.  ]  The  fecond  fort  are  "  Such 
u  as  hold  any  Communion  with  our  Church  unlawful ;  And  he  pretends  to 
"proceed  with  all  poffibleclearnefs] 

Anfx>Q,  I  am  forry  if  more  clearnefs  and  truth  is  become  impofflble  to  him. 
He  taketh  not  me  to  be  one  of  the  fecond  fort,and  therefore  defcribeth  me 
as  of  the  firft  :  Its  no  prefumption  to  fay  that  I  know  my  own  mind  and 
practice  better  than  he  doth,  though  he  would  feem  to  know  the  old  Noa- 
conformifts  minds  better  than  they  did  themfelves. 

Sett.  2.  The  matter  of  fact  muft  firft  be  notified:  i.  I  ever  diftinguifii- 
ed  the  National,  Diocefan,  Parochial,  and  Segregate  Churches :  And  the 
National  as  fuppofed  organized,  or  an  Ecclefiaftically  political  Society, 
from  the  National  as  a  Chriftian  Kingdom,  and  as  an  agreeing  Jffociationo? 
Churches,  without  any  Governor  of  the  whole  {Single  or  Ariftocratical.  ) 
And  I  diftinguifted  Diocefans  that  are  as  Arch-Bifhops  over  lower  Bifhops, 
and  thofe  that  are  like  ours,  infima  jpeciei :  andIdiftingui(hedP*r//7jCW^- 
e s  that  have  true  Taftors,  from  thofe  that  have  none  but  uncapable  men, 
through  infufficiency ,  herefie,  malignity,  or  as  ufurpers  are  not  truly 
called. 

2.  Accordingly  I  concluded,  i.  That  the  Pari(h  Churches  in  England 
that  have  true  Paftors,  are  true  political  governed  Churches.  2.  That 
though  fome  would  make  them  none,  by  denying  to  the  Paftors  an  eflen- 

1  2  tia| 


03 

tial  part  of  thwr  office,  and  make  the  Bifhop  the  fole  Pallor,  and  the  reft 
but  his  Curates,  and  the  Parilhes  no  Churches  as  having  no  Bifhop,  but  to 
be  only  asChappels,  part  of  the  loweft  governed  Church  (Diocefan)  and 
fo  give  up  the  caufe  to  the  Brownifts  called  Separatifts  \  yet  truly  fuch  Pa- 
rilhes are  true  political  Churches,  becaufe  the  ordainer  being  but  the  in- 
vefting  Mnifter,  the  office  is  not  eflentiated  as  he  willeth  or  faith,  but  as  God 
the  Inftituter  willeth  and  faith.  As  the  power  of  the  Hujband  over  the  Wife 
is  not  what  pleafe  thePrieft  that  marry eth  them,  but  what  pleafeth  God 
who  giveth  it  by  his  Law;  and  as  the  Lord  Mayor's  power  is  not  what 
pleafe  the  Recorder,  or  he  that  giveth  him  his  Oath  or  Infignia,  but  what 
the  Kings  Charter  giveth}  and  the  Kings  power  is  not  what  he  will  that 
Crowneth  him  and  giveth  him  his  Oath,  but  what  he  hath  right  to  by  the 
conftitution  of  the  Kingdom  •,  fo  that  the  truth  of  the  Parifh  Churches  is 
foundly  maintained  by  the  Nonconform ifts,  and  overthrown  by  many  of 
the  Diocefans :  But  if  the  Parilh  Minifter  himielf  confent  not  to  the  eflen- 
tials  of  his  own  office,  hisMiniftrymay  be  valid  to  others  while  he  is  in  the 
place,  but  he  is,  himfelf,  no  true  Paftor. 

3.  All  Parilhes  are  no  true  governed  Churches,  whofe  Minifters  want 
any  thing  eflential  to  a  Paftor,  nor  muft  be  owned  as  fuch  if  known. 

4.  But  for  the  peoples  fake  they  are  true  Churches,  ftcnndum  quid,  or 
equivocally  as  a  company  of  Chriftians  may  be  fo  called  that  have  no  Pa- 
llor, and  as  fuch  may  be  fo  far  communicated  with. 

5.  I  never  fpake  againft  a  Diocelan  or  Arch- Bifhop,  that  hath  Parifh 
Churches,  and  true  Pallors  or  Bifhops  under  him,  andtaketh  on  him  no 
more  than  the  Apoftles,  did,  excepting  their  work,  properly  Apoftolical, 
viz..  by  the  Word  and  not  the  Sword,  to  overfee  and  inftrud  inferior 
Pallors. 

6.  When  the  Diocefans  put  down  all  lower  Churches  and  true  Pallors, 
I  own  not  that  doing,nor  them  in  that  form  •,  but  I  feparate  from  them  no 
further  than  they  do  from  Chrift. 

7.  When  they  are  but  as  good  Arch-Bifhops  taking  care  of  many 
Churches,  whether  their  Diocefs  (hall  be  called  a  Church  as  fuch,  is  but  lis 
de  nomine.  1  find  not  that  any  Apoftle  as  fuch,  was  the  conftitutive  Head 
of  a  Diocefan  or  Provincial  Church,  or  made  any  fuch,  above  particular 
Churches :  Nor  do  1  find  in  the  New  Teftament  any  political  Church  form,-, 
butthellniverfal  headed  by  Chrift,  and  particular  ones  governed  by  Pa- 
ilors.The  General  is  the  conftitutive  Head  of  his  Army,  and  the  Colonel 
of  his  Regiment,  and  the  Captain  of  his  Troop,  as  diftincl;  fubordinate 
Bodies*,  but  the  Major  General,  General  of  the  Ordnance,  Qnartermafter 
General,^,  may  beonly[under-Officersto  the  whole,  and  the  nobleft  in- 
tegral 


E*3 

tegral  parts,  but  as  fuch  no  conftitutive  Head  of  any  Body  of  Men  what- 
ever: So  that  General  Paftors  prove  no  fuperior  proper  Chnrch.  But  be- 
caufe  it  was  lawful  in  prudence  for  the  Apoftles  to  have  taken  feveral  Pro- 
vinces, limited  feverally  to  each,  fo  may  men  now  j  and  if  any  call  fuch 
Churches,  I  ftrive  not,  fo  the  matter  be  agreed  on. 

8.  I  ever  owned  a  Chriftian  Kingdom,  and  the  agreeing  AfTociation  of  as 
many  Churches  as  can  for  mutual  help  and  concord,and  the  King  to  be  their 
Governor  by  the  Sword;  And  if  any  will  call  a  Kingdom  a  Church,  or  an 
Afibciation  that  hath  no  conftitutive  Government,  a  Church  •,  as  if  he  cal- 
led a  Diet  or  AiTembly  of  many  Kings  or  Princes,  a  Kingdom  or  Republick, 
let  him  enjoy  his  Equivocation,  fo  we  underftand  each  other. 

9.  According  to  thefe  Principles  I  own  my  lelf  a  Member  of  the  univer- 
fal  Church,of  the  Chnrch  of  England,  and  of  the  Pari(h  or  particular  Church 
where  for  the  time  I  am  called  to  be  •,  that  is,  as  they  are.  But  I  think  I  may 
remove  from  Parifh  to  Parifh  as  I  have  caufe,  as  a  dweller  or  a  lodger  may  *, 
and  I  take  not  all  the  Parifh  to  be  the  Church,  and  take  Parifh  bounds  to 
be  no  Divine  lnftitution,but  a  humane  mutable  point  of  order,  convenient 
when  by  accident  it  croffeth  not  the  end,nor  doth  more  harm  than  good. 

to.  1  think  if  any  Nobleman  in  London  confine  his  ordinary  communion 
to  a  juft  alTembly  in  his~happel,  or  any  that  have  a  Minifter  utterly  un- 
fuitable  to  their  needs,  do  ufually  hold  communion  in  the  next  Parifh 
Church  for  better,  he  is  thereby  neither  §eparatift  nor  Sinner. 

1 1.  According  to  all  this,  when  I  was  filenced  I  ordinarily  heard  Dr. 
Wilkins  and  Dr.  Itllotfon-,  and  communicated  in  feveral  places  as  I  had  belt 
opportunity  •,  and  quickly  going  to  Aclon,  I  there  conftantly  morning  and 
evening  joyned  at  Common  prayer  and  Sermon,  communicating  in  the  Sa- 
crament where  I  had  belt  opportunity, (being  loth  for  the  Parfon  and  Cu- 
rates fike,  to  tell  you  why  it  was  not  there,)  once  with  Dr.  Morton  and  of- 
ten with  Nonconf ormifts.  The  Plague  driving  me  to  Hambden,  I  conftant- 
ly there  joyned  in  all  the  publick  Worfhip  and  Sacrament:  Returning  to 
Allon,  Ididasbefore,andfometimerepeatedDeanK/d"t^'sSermon,  till  he 
got  me  fent  to  Gaol  for  teaching  fome  willing  ignorant  people  between 
the  Church  meetings  in  my  houfe  :  Thence  going  to  'totteridge,  I  many 
years  conftantly  twice  a  day  joyned  in  the  publick  worfhip,  and  took  the 
Sacrament  when  adminiftred  as  Mr.  Parr*  will  teftifie.  Thence  removing  • 
to  London^  and  licenfed  by  the  King  to  preach,  I  forbare  fome  time,  and  af- 
ter chofe  only  the  Market  houfe  at  St.  Jameses,  openly  declaring  that  we 
met  not  asfeparating  from  the  publick  Churches,  but  for  theneed  of  mul- 
titudes that  went  to  no  Church  for  want  of  room.  Since  then  I  have  ma- 
ny years  joyned  in  all  the  publick  worftiip,  Word,  Prayer,  and  Sacraments, 

with 


with  the  Parifh  Church,  when  able,,  fince  that  I  alfo  fometime  joyn  with 
Nbnconformifts,and  preach  my  felf  Afternoons,  and  on  Thursdays  in  the 
Nonconforming  Chappels,  being  not  allowed  to  do  it  otherwife.  In  the 
Country  in  Summer,  I  have  far  off  got  into  fome  Parilh  Churches  for  a  day, 
and  tryed  neer  London^  but  could  not  have  content,  though  I  have  Bifhop 
Sheldon's  Licenfe  for  that  Diocefs,  I  think  not  yet  invalidated.  This  is 
the  matter  of  faft. 

Now  Reader,  Qn.  i .  Doth  the  tenth  part  of  thofe  counted  of  this  Pa- 
rifh  Church,  hear  and  communicate  fo  oft  as  I  do. 

Q^i.  If  not,  what  makes  them  and  not  me  to  be  of  that  Church? 

Q^  3 .  What  is  the  conftancy  that  this  Dr  .maketh  neceflary  to  a  member  ? 

^4.  What  are  the  parts  of  their  worfhip  which  he  faith  1  joyn  not  in.? 
Hath  he  named  any  ? 

^5.  Is  this  only  occafional  joyning  ? 

Sett.  3.  I  do  maintain  that  1.  When,  confideratvs  confiderandis,we  may 
choofe  the  pureft  Churches  and  mofi  edifying  Mmifiry^  it  is  a  duty  fo  to  do. 
And  one  of  his  anfwers  (the  lietlor,  &c.)  hath  in  the  Epiftle  cited  his  own 
words,  not  out  of  the  retraced  henkon,  but  his  late  Book  againfl:  Popery, 
exprefly  threatning  us  with  damnation  if  we  do  not.  To  which  I  find  no 
excufe  made  by  him,  yea  the  Papift  adverfary  grants  the  fame. 

2.  I  do  maintain  againfl:  thofe  that  feparate  from  all  Churches  which 
they  dare  not  be  ftated  members  Of,  that  its  lawful  to  communicate  occafi- 
onally,  where  we  may  not  do  it  ftatedly :  But  is  this  to  deny  all  fave  occa- 
fional communion  with  all  their  Churches  ? 

3.  Ioften  fay  that  there  is  fo  great  difference  of  Parifh  Minifters,  and  of 
Perlbns  cafes  and  opportunities,  and  Relations,  (as  Wives,  Children,  Ser- 
vants, under  Parents,  &c.  of  divers  commands,  &c.)  that  to  be  conftant 
Communicants  in  their  Parifh  Church,  is  to  fome  a  duty,  to  fome  a  fin,  and 
fo  is  occafional  communion. 

Sell.  4.  As  to  the  fecond  fort,  that  hold  allcommunion  with  them  unlawful. 
1.  I  leave  them  to  plead  their  own  caufe,  and  I  meddle  only  with  my  own 
part.  2.  But  I  mull  fay  that  if  they  miftake,  thofe  that  wilfully  give  them 
theoccafion  are  unfit  reprovers  of  them :  And  if  men  for  worldly  ends  or 
by  error,  will  corrupt  and  defile  a  Church  to  the  utmoft  that  is  confident 
with  lawful  Communion  (or  neer  it)  they  may  make  the  queftion  whether 
their  Communion  he  lawful,too  hard  for  underftandings.Every  one  cannot  tell 
whether  one  in  a  fwoon  be  alive  or  dead, and  fome  may  bury  him  too  Jiaftily. 

Stretch  not  my  fimilitude  beyond  my  meaning ,  If  a  Gentleman  of  the 
game  mould  by  wilful  fin,  get  the  Lues  Venerea^  and  the  cafe.be  difputed 
whether  his  wife  may  feparate  from  him,  or  if  he  beat  her  once- a  week,  if 

(he 


[<s?3 


fhe  will  not  daily  eat  that  which  makes  her  grievous  fick,  and  he  doth  it  to 
exercife  his  Authority,  another  may  better  plead  againfl:  her  departure 
than  he :  If  it  be  a  fault  in  her  fo  to  fave  her  felf,  what  is  it  in  him  to  de- 
flroy  or  abufe  her? 

If  we  be  forbidden  to  take  poyfon,  and  one  will  caufelefly  command  us 
to  take  a  doubtful  thing,  as  Nightlhade,  Hemlock,  Auripgmentwn,  &c. 
and  then  condemn  us  asdifobedient  for  refufing,  he  is  the  unfitted  perfbn 
to  condemn  us.  If  it  be  lawful  to  avoid  a  houfe  that  hath  the  Plague,  a 
man  is  excufable  that  miftakes  the  fpotted  Fever  for  it. 

Were  your  Congregations  but  full  of  perfons  that  had  the  fcabs  of  the 
fmall  Pox  not  dryed  away,  and  one  went  to  a  founder  Congregation  for 
fear  of  infection,  not  at  all  condemning  you,  he  might  be  born  with.  If 
in  the  beginning  of  Queen  Elizabeths  Reign,  when  abundance  of  Papift 
Priefts  ftaid  in  the  Churches  for  their  Benefices,  a  man  had  quietly  gone 
from  them  to  the  Nonconform ifts,  I  could  not  blame  him  •,  though  he  had 
not  been  fure  that  they  were  not  changed. 

And  I  dill  fay  that  if  fuch  erre  by  too  much  care  to  avoid  fin  and  fave 
their  fouls,  i.  It  isa  far  greater  error  to  give  them  the  occafion.  2.  And 
in  fuch  as  you  to  fay,  that  therefore  they  mull  be  fo  far  forfaken,  as  that 
none  may  preach  to  them.  If  I  may  preach  to  no  erring  people,  1 . 1  mull 
preach  to  none.     2.  Or  be  no  Phyfician  to  any  that  are  fick. 

And  I  mud  fay,  that  though  I  found  no  call  to  gather  any  together  as 
a  Church,  and  give  them  the  Sacrament-,  I  cannot  fay  that  no  other  had 
fuch,  unlefsl  had  heard  them  all  fpeak  for  themfelves :  yea  I  fee  fuch  no- 
torious need  in  many  places,  that  1  dar^  not  blame  them. 

Sett.  5.  And  now  Reader,  Qh.  whether  the  Dr.  hath  truly  dated  the 
cafe  between  him  and  me  \  and  whether  you  can  expect  truth  and  edifica- 
tion in  his  handling  of  a  falfe-flated  cafe. 

Thcfe  are  the  queflions  which,  as  my  accufer,  (in  his  Book)  he  fhould 
have  handled,  had  truth  been  his  defign.  1.  tl  Whether  for  one  that 
"holdeth  fo  much  Communion  with  their  Churches  as  I  have  done,  and 
"here  defer ibe  ,  it  be  finful  feparation  to  Preach  in  and  Communicate 
"with  the  Afiemblies  of  Nonconforming,  or  mixt  ones,  as  I  have  done.? 
Cl  2.  Whether  to  deny  this  to  be  finful  Separation  (or  Separation  as  com- 
"mor.ly  taken  for  Schifm)  be  di  (ingenious,  and  worfe  than  theirs  that  open- 
aly  renounce  their  Communion. 

Sett.  6.  Three  things  he  faith,  p.  94.  we  cannot  deny,  1.  That  there 
is  no  reafon  of  Separation  becanfe  of  the  Doctrine  of  their  Church. 

Anfv9.  1.  We  diflinguifn  of  Separation  :  There  is  no  reafon  to  lepa- 
rate  from  you  as  no  Church,  or  further  than  we  do  }  there  is  reafon  to 

deny 


deny  our  content,  i  .To  your  forefaid  Do&rine  of  all  baptized  dying'Infants 
undoubted  falvation,  not  excepting  thofe  of  Atheifts  and  Infidels.  2.T0 
your  included  Do&rine  implyed  in-your  Impofitions,  viz."  That  if  a  man 
*c  have  unlawfully  made  a  Vow  and  Oath  to  endeavour  in  his  Place  and  Cal- 
ling to  reform  fome  corruptions  in  Church-Government,  yea  ortore- 
li  pent  of  his  fin  and  oppofe  Popery,  Prophanenefs,  and  Schifm;  there  is 
"no  obligation  on  him  from  that  Oath  and  Vow  to  do  it.  Thefe  and 
fuch  other  Do&rines  we  feparate  from,  fo  far  as  to  reject  them. 

Sett.  7.  His  fecond  fuppofed Conceflion  is,  Q That  there  is  no  other  reafott 
of  Separation  becaufe  of  the  terms  of  our  Communion,  than  what  was  from  the  be- 
ginning of  the  Reformation. 

Anfw.  1 .  There  are  in  my  judgment  no  common  reafons  for  going 
further  from  you  than  we  do,  nor  to  juftifie  that  which  is  commonly 
known  by  the  name  of  Separation.    But  there  are  many  and  great  reafons 
to  juftifie  ourmeafure  of  difTent  and  miniftration  •,  and  to  fay  that  [_we 
grant  there  are  no  more  reafons  now  than  were  then,  ]  is  too  bold  an  untruth. 
There  is  more  reafon ,  1.  From  the  quality  of  the  things  impofed. 
2.  From  the  defignsand  drift  of  the  Impofition.     3.  From  the  effects. 
4.  From  the  aggravation  of  Conformity  as  in  the  Church  that  we  muft 
communicate  with.     5.  From  the  things  which  give  us  a  fuller  caufe  for 
our  Preaching  and  AfTemblies.  viz..   1.  The  late  general  contrary  Church 
State  and  Engagement  to  it.     2.  The  Plague.     3.  The  burning  of  the 
Churches.    4.  The  Kings  Licenfe  and  Clemency.     5.  The  number  and 
quality  of  them  that  feek  our  helps.     Of  thefe -briefly  in  order. 
1 .  As  to  the  things  impofed  now  which  were  not  then. 

1.  The  VeftryAdt  was  not  then  made,  by  which  fo  confiderable  a  part 
of  your  Parifh  Churches  as  the  Veftries,  are  to  renounce  all  obligations  to 
endeavour  any  alteration  of  the  Government  of  the  Church,  from  the 
Oath  and  Vow  called  the  Covenant :  So  that  all  Reformation  of  Church 
Government  as  fo  fworn,  was  thus  renounced  by  them  who  in  a  fort  re* 
prefent  the  Parifh  Church. 

2.  The  Ad  of  Uniformity  had  not  then  impofed  the  fame  declarative 
Renunciation  of  all  fuch  obligation  on  all  the  Minifters  and  Schoolmafters 
in  England,  as  it  now  doth. 

3.  The  Corporation  A&  was  not  then  in  being,  which  conftituteth  all 
the  Officers  in  power  in  all  Cities  and  Corporations,  of  fuch  only  as  de- 
clare, £  that  there  is  no  obligation  from  the  [aid  Oath  at  all,  ]■  not  excepting 
fo  much  as  the  fworn  duties  of  oppofing  Popery ,  Prophanenefs,  and 
Schifm,  to  repent  of  fin  and  amend  our  lives.     And  Iffwearing  and  vowing  a* 

gainji  Schifm,  no  whit  bind  men  (if  the  Oath  were  but  unlawfully  impo- 
fed, 


C«5] 


fed,  why  (hould  the'Dr.  make  fo  great  a  matter  of  it,  and  think  that  his 
reafonings  (hould  make  men  afraid  of  Gods  ferv ice,  if  he  will  but  call  it 
Schifm. 

4.  None  of  thefe  Acts  then  required  men  to  profefs  and  fubfcribe, 
that  there  is  from  that  Vow  or  Oath  no  fuch  Obligation  on  any  other 
perfon ;  and  (b  to  become  Vouchers  for  the  Souls  and  Confciences  of 
many  hundred  thouiands  whom  we  never  faw  \  even  thofe  Parliament 
men  that  were  not  forced  to  it,  but  impofed  it  on  others,  when  we  know 
not  in  what  fenfe  they  took  it. 

5.  The  Re-ordination  of  Minifters  ordained  by  Presbyteries  was  not 
then  required,  and  made  a  neceffary  condition  of  their  Ministration  and 
Church  Relation,  (even  by  them  that  confefs  Re-ordination  unlawful, 
and  therefore  plainly  intimate  the  nullity  of  the  firft.) 

6.  The  Aft  of  Uniformity  was  not  then  made,  which  requireth  all 
Minifters  publickJy  to  declare  their  Affent  and  Confent  to  all  things  contain- 
ed in,  and  prefer  ibed  by  the  Liturgy,  Book^of Ordination,  (though  part  of 
this  was  in  a  Canon.) 

7.  The  falfe  Rule  for  finding  Eafler-day  was  not  then  to  be  aflented 
and  confented  to ,  as  a  condition  of  the  Miniftry. 

8.  Nor  the  new  Doctrine  or  Article  of  Faith,  [of  the  undoubted  cer- 
tainty by  Gods  word,  that  baptized  dying  Infants  are  favedy  ~]  (without  any 
exception  of  the  children  of  Atheifts,  &c.)  For  the  old  words  at  Confir- 
mation fas  many  Drs.  of  the  Church  have  (hewed)  only  meant  that  no- 
thing  elfe  was  neceflary  on  the  Churches  part ,  that  is ,  not  Confir- 
mation. 

9.  The  word  ZPaftor~\  as  applyed  to  Parilh  Minifters  diftinft  from 
Curates,  was  not  then  blotted  out  of  moft  places  in  the  Liturgy  ;  nor 
the  twentieth  of  Acts,  as  applied  to  Presbyters,  left  out,  (Take  heed  to 
your  fclves  and  the  Flock,  &c.)  in  plain  defign  to  alter  the  Office  and  Pa- 
rifh  Churches. 

10.  The  Oxford  Oath  was  not  then  impofed,  to  banifh  Minifters  above 
five  miles  from  all  Cities,  and  Corporations,  and  Places,  where  they  had 
of  late  years  preached  ;  fo  that  their  old  Flock  or  Friends  (yea,  Wives 
and  Children  that  could  not  follow  them)  might  not  fo  much  as  fee  or 
hear  fuch  Minifters  in  their  Families,  or  familiar  converfe  that  would  have 
come  to  the  publick  Churches :  And  all  Nonconforming  Minifters  that 
took  not  the  Oath,  were  thereby  forbidden  to  come  to  the  Parifh  Church- 
es in  all  Cities,  Corporations,  or  Places  aforefaid,  though  their  example 
might  have  drawn  many  (as  mine  did  where  I  wasj 

K  11.  Minifters 


1661 


1 1.  Minifters  and  Corporations  and  Veftries,  were  not  then  bound  to 
fwear  or  fublcribe,  that  it  is  unlawful  on  any  pretence  whatsoever  to  rejifi  any 
commijjioned  by  the  King  \  when  the  Keeper  of  his  Seal  may  fign  Commiffions 
to feize  on  the  KingsForts ,  Garrifons,  Navies,  and  Treafuries,  to  de- 
liver up  the  Kingdoms  to  Foreigners,  to  deftroy  Parliaments,  Cities,  and 
Laws  :  I  am  fore  Hooker ,  BUfon,  or  Arch-Bilhop  Abbot,  fubfcribed  not 
this ,  nor  were  fuch  Conformifts.  Are  all  thefe  no  difference  of 
cafe  ? 

Sett.  8.  There  is  2.  a  great  difference  in  the  drift  and  tendency  of 
the  Impofltions.  They  were  at  firfl:  to  quiet  a  Popifh  Nation,  while  the 
true  Doctrine  took  poffeifion  and  rooting  ,  and  to  avoid  the  cavils  of 
thofe  Papifts  that  charged  the  Reformers  with  forfaking  all  the  Church : 
But  what  they  have  been  ufed  for  thefe  laft  forty  or  fifty  years,  I  leave 
the  Reader  to"  judge. 

1.  By  the  Complaints  of  all  the  Parliaments,  fincethen,  faveone. 

2.  By  theHiftory  of  Arch-Bilhop  L^'sTryal. 

3.  By  Dr.  Heylin's  Hiftory  of  his  Life. 

4.  By  the  writings  of  Divines,  f\\ch  as  Mr.  Thomdifa  Dr.  Parker,  Dr. 
Tierce^  Arch-Biihop  Bromhall,  and  many  more  fuch  •,  and  by  the  Papifts 
hiftorical  collection  out  of  fuch. 

See  Dr.  Heylirfs  defcription  of  the  Reconciling  Plot,  Anno  1639. 

Arch  Bifbop  Bromhalfokh,  Vindicat.  p.  ip.  &c.  "  [  Whereas  Mr.  Baxter 
"doth  accufe  GrotillS  as  aPapifi,lthtvk  he  doth  him  wrong,  nay  I  am  confident 

Cc  he  doth  him  wrong And  1  have  read  all  that  he  aliedgeth  to  prove  it,but 

"without  any  conviction  or  alteration  in  my  judgment. 1  will  endea- 

tl  vour  to  give  fome  further  light  what  was  the  Religion  of  Grotim  .•  He 
t:  was  in  affection  a  friend,  and  in  defire  a  true  Son  of  the  Church  (a)  of 
"England:  And  on  his  Deathbed  recommended  that  Church,  as  it  was  le- 
i(  gaily  eftablifhed  to  his  Wife,  and  fuch  other  of  his  Family  as  were  then 
"  about  him,  obliging  them  by  his  Authority  to  adhere  firmly  to  it. 

The  faidBifhop  (though  noPapift)  faith,  pag.  81.  "(p]t\  know  n° 
u  members  of  the  Greek  Church,who  give  them  (the  Papifts)  either  more 
"orlefsthan  I  do  :  (Compare  this  with  the  Council  at  Florence,  and  the 
0  Patriarch  Jeremiah's  Writings,  and  the  prefent  fence  of  the  Greek 


(a)  7  he  new  Church  ftna  Btjhop  Laud's  change,  (b;  Note  that  the  Bifhops  Boo^  as  againfl 
me,  runs  upon  a  mere  fitfion,  p.  76.  that  I  traduce  him  as  a  Fattor  for  Popery,  when  J  had 
not  a  word  to  that  purpofe ;  yea  exprejly  excepted  him  by  name,  though  I  argued  again ft  his  too. 
mr  approach.  tt  _f 

n  "Church 


[*7] 


"Church,  and  we  may  know  his  mind  : )  But  my  ground  is  not  the  au- 
"  thority  of  the  Greek  Church,but  the  authority  of  the  Primitive  Fathers, 
"and  General  Councils,  which  are  the  representative  Body  of  the  Uni- 
tf  verfal  Church,  (c)  P.  82.  [  To  wave  their  laft  four  hundred  years 
"determinations,  is  implicitly  to  renounce  all  the  neceflary  caufes  of 
"  this  great  Schifm.  (d)  And  to  reft  fatisfied  with  their  old  Patriarchal 
"  power  and  dignity,  and  Primacy  of  Order,  (which  is  another  part  of 
"my  Proportion)  is  to  quit  the  modern  Papacy,  name  and  thing,  (e) 

"Pag.  84,  85.  [  That  Chriftians  may  joyn  together  in  the  fame  pub- 

"lick  devotions  and  fervice  of  ChrihV 1.  If  the  Biihop  of  Rome 

"  were  reduced  from  the  Pniverfality  of  Soveraign  Jurifdictioii,  jure  di- 
"  ww,  to  his  frincipinm  mtttatu,  and  his  Court  regulated  by  the  Canons 
"of  the  Fathers,  which  was  the  fence  of  the  Councils  otGmftance  and 
"  Bafd,  andisdefired  by  many  Roman  Catholicks,  as  well  as  we.  '2.  If 
"the  Creed  were  reduced  to  what  they  were  in  the  time  of  the  four  firft 
**  General  Councils,  with  only  neceflary  explications,  and  thofe  made 
"by  the  Authority  of  a  General  Council.    3.  And  fome  things  whence 

"offences  have  been  given  or  taken,be  put  out  of  the  Divine  Offices 

"Whether  Chriftians  ought  not  to  live  in  holy  Communion,  and  come 
"to  the  fame  publick  worfhip  of  God,  free  from  all  fchifmaticai  fepa- 
"  rations,  (f) 

"Pag.  93.  1.  That  St.  Ptter  had  a  fixed  Chair  atAntioch,  and  after  at 

"&?we,isatruth. 2.  That  St.  Peter  had  a  Primacy  of  Order  among 

"the  Apoftles,  is  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  Primitive  Church r 

"3.  Some  Fathers  and  Schoolmen  who  were  no  fworn  Vaffais  to  the  Roman 
"Bifhop,  do  affirm  that  this  Primacy  of  Order  is  fixed  to  the  Chair  of 
uSt.  Peter. 

"P.  97.  Though  the  Bifliop  of  Rome  had  fuch  a  Primacy  of  Order  by 
"Divine  Right  or  Humane,  it  would  not  prejudice  us  at  all,  nor  is  worth 
u  the  contending  about.  But,  1-  It  is  not  by  Divine  Right  in  foro  cxteriorc. 
"  2.  Norelfewhere  (interiore)  but  executive  according  to  the  Canons. (g) 


<c 


(c)  No  fuch  thing,  but  of  the  Churches  within  the  Empire  then,  (d)  was  there  no  neceffarj 
cauG  till  after,  An.  1 200  ?  (e)  So  then  theft  Prottftant  Bifhops  give  the  Pope  Patriarchal  Pow- 
er, and  Primacy  of  Order,  and  as  much  as  the  Greeks  :  But  1.  They  had  by  Councils  0]  old  no  Pa- 
triarchal Power  over  othtr  Kjngdoms  out  of  the  Empire,  z.  Obedience  to  the  Pope  as  a  Patriarchy 
is  againft  the  Oath  of  Supremacy,  and  on  the  matter  little  difftrttb  our  caje  from  obeying  him  as 
Pope.  (()  So  that  this  Arcb-Btfhop  alfo  was  fet  on  thepiow  dtjign  ofjoyning  with  thtPapifts  on 
thefe  terms,  and  may  not  we  have  leave  to  worjhip  God  on  better  terms  ?  (gj  That  is,  1.  The 
Pope  is  not  to  govern  us  arbitrarily,  but  by  Canons,  (uhicb  what  they  art  is  hardly  known.) 
2.  And  all  will  be  Schifmatic^s,  tkatfo  obey  him  not. 

K  2  Whereas 


on 

Whereas  I  faid  that  Proteftants  that  confent  not  to  the  Popes  Patriar- 
chal Power  over  us  in  the  Weft,  will  fall  under  the  reproach  of  Schifm-,  he 
faith,  p.  104.  &c.  [Muft  a  man  quit  his  juft  right  be^ufefomediflike  it  <* 
Their  diflike  is  but  fcandai  taken,  but  the  quitting  of  that  whkh  is  right 
for  their  fatisfaction,  fhould  be  fcandai  given,  (h)  If  they  be  forced  to 
fall  under  the  reproach  of  Schifmaticks,  it  isby  their  own  wilful  humors, 
or  erroneous  Confcience ,  other  force  there  is  none.  2.  Whether  is  the 
worfe  and  more  dangerous  condition,  to  fall  under  the  reproach  of  Schifm, 
or  to  fall  into  Schifm  it  felf  ?  Whofoever  {hall  oppofe  the  juft  power  of  a 
lawful  Patriarch  lawfully  proceeding,  is  a  material  Schifmatick  at  leaft.— 
P.  107.  It's  unfound  arguing  to  deny  a  man  his  juft  right  for  fear  left  he 
may  abufe  it,  as  a  Patriarchal  Power  was  the  Bifhop  of  Rome's  juft  right. 
They  who  made  the  Bifhop  of  Rome  a  Patriarch  were  the  Primitive  Fathers, 
not  excluding  the  Apoftles  and  Chriftian  Emperors  and  Oecumenical  Coun- 
cils: what  Laws  they  made  in  this  cafe  we  are  bound  to  obey  for  Confci- 
ence fake,  till  lawfully  repealed  by  vertueoftheLaw  of  Chrift.  (i) 

Much  more  he  hath  to  this  purpofe,  and  />.  112.  for  uniting  the  Church 
Catholickon  humane  terms,  and  p.  117.  againft  the  peoples  liberty  of 
reading  and  interpreting  Scripture*,  and  after  at  large  that  concord  muft 
be  on  humane  terms,/>.i22.  [Grotim  judgment  was,  and  mine  is  moderate,"] 
but  had  not  this  man  been  fo  owned  by  many  now,  I  had  not  cited  fo  much 
of  his.  And  for  Grotiw,  I  have  over  and  over  cited  his  own  words,  and 
fliall  not  now  repeat  them :  And  was  this  the  drift  of  Conformity  of  old  ? 

3.  Sell.  9.  Another  difference  is  in  the  effects-;  for  with  us,  things  not 
univerfally  or  abiblutely  determined  by  God,  are  to  be  ufed  or  refufed  as 
they  do  more  good  or  hurt-  1.  Then  open  Preaching  and  gathering  Af- 
fembliesby  Nonconformifts,  would  have  greatly  offended  the  Prince; 
but  our  King  at  B--eda>  and  in  h  s  three  firft  Declarations,  and  by  his  Li- 
cenfes,  and  connivence,  fhewed  fuch  wifdom  and  clemency,  as  intimated 


(h)  1.  thus  for  union  with  Rome,  all  Protectants  mutt  pafs  for  felf  made  Schifmaticks,  that 
cannot  obey  the  Pope  as  Patriarch :  And  doth  this  tend  indeed  to  Concord  ?  It  would  open  Prote- 
ctants eyes,  did  I  but  tell  you  all  that  is  in  the  Canons,  which  the  Pope  as  our  Patriarch  muft  rule 
us  by,  as  theft  Doclors  do  defire.  (0  i-  if  this  Doftrine  be  true,  no  wonder  th it  Mr.  Thomd'ikc 
thought  we  could  not  juft  i fie  our  Reformation,  till  ne  alter  the  Oath  of  Supremacy ,  then  we  are 
bound  in  confcience  to  a  Foreign  Jurifdiclion.  1.  lhavi  fully  proved  many  great  errors  and  fins 
to  be  decreed  by  many  of  the  Councils,  by  which  the  Pope,  as  Patriarchy  muft  rule  m  all.  $.  is  it 
any  eafier  to  do  evil  In  obedience  to  a  Patriarch  than  a  Pope  ?  4.  In  my  I  aft  Boo^  againft  W.  John- 
ion,  alias  Tenet,  ihavefdiy  confuted  alt  that  he  faith  of  the  universality  of  Councils,  and  the. 
Patriarchs  power  over  the  Abaffines,  and  others  without  the  Ewpre,  and  fhewed  they  were  then 
aU  but  in  one  Empire^  as  the  Arth-Bifbop  of  Canterbury  is  in  England. 

left 


lefs  difpleafure  at  our  liberty.  2.  It  would  have  deprived  mod  of  the  Non- 
conforming s  0 f  their  hopes  of  publick  liberty  in  the  Pai  i(h  C hurches,  whic h 
molt  of  them  enjoyed ;  but  we  had  neither  poflefTion  nor  expectation  of 
fuch  a  thinge  3. It  would  have  hindred  and  hazarded  the  progrefs  of  the 
Reformation,  but  our  preaching  hath  done  more  to  flop  the  progrefs  of 
the  Syncretifm,  or  of  Popery  :  Others  know  this  whatever  you  frivoloully 
fay  againft  it.  4.  Few  of  the  mod:  ignorant  that  needed  them  would  then 
have  left  the  Pariih  Churches,  to  hear  Nonconform  ills  in  private-,  but  now 
many  will  come  to  us  that  cannot  get  in  to  the  Paridi  Churches:  Other  dif- 
ferent effects  may  be  named. 

Sett.  10.  4.  And  though  Iaccufe  you  not,  you  that  unjuftly  (aid  before 
that  I  made  you  feem  a  company  of  perjured  Villains^  feems  to  think  your  fclf 
that  the  fore  alledged  caufes  make  many  of  the  people  think  little  better  of 
fome  ;  and  a  Church  thought  to  confift  of  fiich  Pallors  and  Veftries,  &c. 
(eflential  parts)  differ  from  thofe  that  do  not.  2.  And  the  multitude  of 
Atheifts  and  filthy  livers,  and  thethoufandsof  Noncommunicants  who  are 
ftill  taken  for  real  members  of  your  Churches,  have  now  (food  out  againft 
fo  long  means  and  patience,  that  the  reafons  of  longer  waiting  for  Re  for- 
rration,  much  differs  from  theirs  in  the  beginning.  3.  The  Canon  at  firft 
did  not  ipfo  facto,  excommunicate  all  that  do  but  profefs  themfelves  Non- 
conformifts,  as  fince  it  did.  4.  The  Biihops  and  their  Canoneers  had  not 
then  call  out  :oco,  norneer  fo  many  Preachers  as  now,  and  lb  did  not  fo 
much  tempt  the  people  to  flee  from  them  as  perfecutors,  thorns,  thiftle?, 
or  wolves.  5.  When  one  Bifhop  call  any  out,  fome  other  ufually  would  en- 
dure them,  but  now  it  was  not  16.  6.  The  people  faw  daily,  that  you  bore 
with  thofe  as  no  Schiimaticks,  that  never  communicated  nor  ufed  to  hear 
you,  even  the  greater  half  of  many  Parilhes,  and  took  them  for  Church 
members  as  is  faid  \  and  therefore  they  had  reafon  to  hope  that  they  that 
communicated  fomewhere  with  Protectants  efpecially  that  communicated 
alfo  with  your  own  Churches,  were  as  good  Members,  and  by  good  Pa- 
llors, would  be  as  well  endured. 

Sett.  1 1.  5-LaftIy,  The  forenamed  caufes  of  our  preaching  much  differ. 
1 .  We  faw  the  Kingdom  (though  under  ufurpers;  engaged  by  Vow,  Pra- 
ctice, and  about  fixteen  years  poflellion  and  cuftom,  to  another  way  ;  and 
who  could  expect  that  a  Law  fhould  prefently  change  them  all,  and  allure 
them  of  abfoLtion.  2.  They  that  conformed  were  the  more  averfe,  to  fee 
about  fix  thoufand  Minifters  that  had  gone  the  other  way,  fo  fuddenly 
changers  to  declare  afTent  and  confent  to  a  Book  which  they  never  faw.  3 . 
The  cafeof  thePlague,the  burning  of  the  Churches,theKingsLicenfes,c>c. 
I  named  before,  which  verily  made  a  great  difference.  4.  And  the  numbers 

that 


Oo] 

that  call  to  us  for  help  makes  a  great  difference ,  when  then  they  that 
needed  them  moft,did  not  defire  it.Thefe  are  fome  differences. 

Sett.  12.  p.  95-  He  faith,  There  is  no  reafon  of feparation  becaufe  of  the  do- 
Urine  of  our  Church,  ~]  Anfw-  But  now  you  have  corrupted  it,  in  the  Ar- 
ticle of  Infants  undoubted  falvation  before  defcribed,  (and  before  by  the 
doftrines  about  Prelacy,  Godfathers  power  and  duty,  Impofitions,  &c. 
imply  ed  in  your  practical  Canons  J  there  is  great  caufe  of  Nonconformity. 

»  P.  p6.  Repeatetb  that  great  miftake,  that  [  there  are  no  alterations,  in 
our  own  judgment,  which  make  the  terms  of  Communion  harder  than  before."} 
Anfvt.  What  hope  then  of  being  underltood .?  how  far  is  this  from  truth  ? 
The  terms  are  far  harder  to  Minifters  ?  and  to  the  people  they  are  eafier 
in  fome  things  (as  amending  fome  tranflations,  &c.)  but  it  is  not  to  them 
a  fmall  matter  to  make  fuch  a  change  of  their  Pallors,  as  in  too  many  Pantil- 
es is  made.  TheBilhoppromifed  them  at  Kiderminfter  >  when  he  forbad 
me  to  preach,  that  they  fhould  be  no  lofers  by  the  change :  They  faid  (and 
I  had  great  reafon  to  believe  them)  that  the  Succeflbr  knew  fo  little  of  the 
fence  of  the  Creed,  and  preach'd  fo  rarely  (four  times  a  year)  lam  loth 
to  tell  you  how,  that  they  durft  not  be  guilty  of  encouraging  him  in  un- 
dertaking the  charge  of  Souls,  nor  durft  take  him  for  their  Paftor :  And 
t he  gr eat  increafe  of  buildings  in  London,  fliuts  thou fands  now  out  of  fuch 
Pariih  Churches,  who  could  have  got  in  heretofore ,  and  fome  more  dif- 
ferences are  before  implyed.  p.  97.  As  other  Churches  own  your  Church- 
es, fo  do  we,  though  not  your  impofed  fins. 

Sett.  1 3 .  p.  I  was  in  hope  to  have  met  with  fome  anfwer  to  my  impor- 
tunate QueftionJ^JFte  would  yon  have  the  many  fcore  thoufandt  do,  that  cannot 
come  withm  your  Churches  to  heat  ?  ]  But  no  importunity  will  prevail  for  fb 
fmall  a  matter  with  inexorable  men.  But  he  faith,  1.  that  \_this  U  but  a  pre 
fence.  ]  2.  And  that  C  no  man  denyeth  that  more  places  are  de fir  able,  &c.  ]  Anf. 
1 .  It  is  me  that  he  is  now  accufing !  why  doth  he  barely  fay  and  not  prove, 
that  it's  but  a  pretence  ?  Ineverfetup  a  Meeting  place,  but  in  St.  Mar- 
tins Parilh,  where  are  faid  to  be  forty  thoufand  more  than  can  come  with- 
in the  Church :  And  when  they  would  not  fuffer  me  to  ufe  it,  I  gladly  left 
it  to  the  ufe  of  the  Parifh  Minifter.  1  preach  now  twice  a  week  elfewhere, 
but  both  the  places  are  in  Neighbourhoods, where  many  thoufands  cannot 
hear  in  the  Parilh  Churches.  What  if  other  men  have  other  fufficient  rea- 
fons  (as  the  utter  incapacity  of  fome  Minifters,  or  the  like)  doth  it  follow 
that  my  own  cafe  and  profeffed  reafon  is  a  meer  pretence  I  why  then  did 
I  ufe  no  publick  preaching,  while  Hived  in  fuch  Villages  where  the  people 
might  go  to  Church  >  and  why  did  1  conftantly  twice  a  day  lead  them  thi- 
ther, though  fome  difliked  it  ?  2.The  queftion  is  not  whether  moreChnrch- 


es  are  deferable  ?  But  where  they  are  not,  whether  many  t houfands  mud  live 
like  Atheifts,  without  all  publick  teaching  or  Divine  Worfhip,  for  fear  of 
being  called  Schifmaticks.  Is  not  this  plainly  to  chufe  damnation  ?  If  the 
Gofpel  be  needlefs,  why  do  we  vvifn  the  Heathens  had  it?  Why  fubfcribe 
you  againfl  mens  hopes  of  being  faved  in  all  their  feveral  Religions  ?  If 
Church  worfhip  be  needlefs,  why  is  a  Clergy  to  be  fo  honoured,  and  main- 
tained at  fo  dear  a  rate  f  Aud  why  do  you  make  fuch  a  ftir  with  Separatifts 
to  bring  them  to  your  Churches  ?  Can  men,  not  blinded  by  intereft,  chufe 
but  wonder,  that  fo  many  thoufands  in  a  Parifh  (hould  be  taken  for  Church 
Members,  and  live  quietly,  that  come  not  to  any  Church,  or  never  com- 
municate with  any,  and  yet  that  godly  perfons  who  hear  and  communicate 
with  their  old  tryed  Paftors  (yea  with  fuch  as  communicate  with  you ) 
mould  be  preach'd  and  written  againft  as  Schifmaticks,  and  judged  to  that 
which  fome  endure.  Did  this  Dr.  think  that  to  drop  in  the  cafe  of  other 
men,  when  he  was  at  a  lofs,  would  make  good  his  charge  againft  me,  and 
fuch  as  I :  Mr.  Tombes  and  Mr.  Williams  preached  other  doctrine  ;  do  I  do 
fo,  and  have  you  proved  it  f 

But  feeing  he  wiil  needs  bring  the  cafe  to  Kidermwfier,  whether  I  would 
fuffer  Mr.  Tombes  to  gather  a  Congregation,  I  muft  not  balk  it  \  but  advife 
him  hereafter  to  keep  himfelf  at  a  greater  diftance,  and  not  to  put  his  own 
followers,  who  are  wiHing  enough  to  believe  him,  upon  utter  impoflibili- 
ties  :  He  fped  better  with  them  when  he  laid  the  fcene  an  hundred  years 
backward  :or  as  far  offas  New  England-^t  him  know  then  all  thefe  things  in 
confutation  of  his  hiftorical  fuppofition.  i  .That  Kidermhfier  Parifh  hath  but 
about  three  thoufand  or  four  thoufand  fouls,  and  the  Church  fo  fit  (with 
five  Galleries)  that  all  may  hear:  But  hisParifh  isfaid  to  have  twenty  thou- 
fand fouls,  of  which  not  four  thoufand  can  hear.  2.  Aconfiderable  part  of 
Kiderminfter  Parifh,  called  Ridnd,  being  at  Bcwdly  Bridge  end,  and  two  miles 
from  Kiderminfter ,  (and  fome  Villages  more  J  ufually  were  Mr.  Tombes  his 
hearers  at  Bewdley,  and  I  never  blamed  them.  3.  After  him,  they  were 
Hearers  and  Communicants  to  his  SuccefTor  Mr.  Oafland,  and  he  took  the 
Paftoral  care  of  them  fthat  defired  any  •, )  and  I  was  fo  far  from  blaming 
him,  that  I  greatly  thanked  him,  and  we  wrcre  far  from  difagreeing. 
4.  Though  Mr.  Tombes  and  I  differed  in  the  doctrine  of  Infant  Baptifm,  I 
gave  him  leave  ( yea  and  the  Quakers  too  J  in  the  publick  Church  many 
hours  together,  to  fay  all  that  they  coald  for  their  opinions  in  the  hearing 
of  my  Auditors,  and  none  of  them  ever  won  one  of  them  that  I  heard  of, 
(yet  the  Dr.  fuppofeth  fome  great  danger  of  their  peoples  fedndtion,  if 
they  hear  fuch  as  I  that  never  were  accufed  of  falfe  Doctrine.  5.  But  he  hath 
chofen  an  inftance  yet  neerer  our  prefent  cafe;  Another  part  of  Kider- 

minflrr 


mtifier  Parilh  is  neer  three  miles  off,  at  a  Village  called  Mitton;  where  at 
theChappei  I  found  a  Curate  called  Mr.  Turner,  infamous  for  drunkennefs, 
fighting,  living  on  unlawful  marriage,  and  for  grofs  ignorance :  (I  tryed 
him,  and  perceived  not  that  he  underftood  much  of  the  Creed  J  1  fent  them 
a  worthy  Preacher  once  a  day  firft,  and  twice  after,  and  declared  my  utter 
diflent  to  Mr.  Turner's  Miniftry  •,  yet  becaufe  fome  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land would  have  him ,  and  he  would,  againft  my  will,  read  the  Common 
Prayer  to  them  once  a  day,  I  hindred  them  not  from  their  choice,  but  they 
went  on.  6.  And  the  fequeftred  Vicar  in  the  Town  (Mr.  Dance)  was  ge- 
nerally taken  to  be  as  ignorant  as  he,  fo  that  when  once  a  quarter  he  went 
into  the  Pulpit,  his  own  Wife,  though  of  the  Church  of  England,  would 
for  (hame  go  out  of  Church:  Yet  did  I  never  forbid  him  to  preach,  and  he 
oft  read  the  Common  Prayer  at  Sir  Ralph  Clares,  and  I  fuppofe  gave  them 
the  Sacrament.     7.  I  had  opportunity  then  to  have  hindred  all  this  if  I 
would  have  ufed  Magiftrates :  They  were  both  by  Proclamation  to  remove 
two  miles  oft  but  neither  of  them  once  removed  fo  much  as  out  of  their 
houfes,  nor  did  I  defire  it  •,  but  we  are  by  law  driven  five  miles  off.  8.  Mr. 
Vance  had  forty  pounds  a  year  allowed  him,  and  Mr.  Turner  never  had  a 
groat  of  his  ancient  Salary  diminilhed,  when  another  was  put  in,  but  the 
other  paid  otherwife  -,  but  we  ask  you  nothing  for  aflifting  you.  9. 1  had 
never  one  hundred  pounds  to  my  felf,  and  therefore  could  maintain  no 
more  help  •,  (two  Affiftants  I  had;  but  have  you  no  more  to  maintain  At 
fiftants?  Now  judge  how  well  your  hiftoricallnftances  ferve  your  turn* 

And  befides  the  number  of  Souls,  very  many  Parifhes  are  fa  wide,  that 
diftance  forbiddeth  many  to  come  to  the  publick  Parilh  Churches :  Some 
Villages  are  five  miles,  fome  four,  and  many  three  miles  off-,  and  how  can 
Families,  efpecially  Women,  Children,  and  the  aged,  and  efpecially  in 
winter,  go  fo  far  twice  for  oncej  a  day  :  And  muft  all  thefe  forbear  to 
hear,  or  to  worfhip  God,  for  fear  of  being  counted  Schifmaticks? 

Becaufe  the  Dr.  appealeth  to  my  felf,  I  ferioufly  profefs  that  when  1  had 
a  Paftoral  Charge,  (which  was  but  in  one  placej  1  would  have  been  very 
thankful  to  any  one  that  differed  no  more  than  the  Dr.  and  I  do,  that 
would  have  gathered  a  Congregation  of  fuch,  as  for  number  or  diftance 
could  not  have  come  into  the  Parifh  Church*,  and  the  cafe  of  diftance  did 
occafion  the  honeft  fcparation  aforefaid,  though  the  cafe  of  numbers  did 
not :  Yea  when  hundreds  defired  Communion  according  to  the  Common 
Prayer,  I  never  offered  to  hinder  any  of  them  from  taking  it  where  and 
how  they  would. 

Seel,  14.  P.  99.  He  ftith  [This  is  Mr.  B3Xter's  own  Cafe— when  he  is 
{inched  with  the  Point  of  Separation,  thm  he  declares,  that  his  hearers  are 

tht 


C733 

defame  with  ours  ;  at  leafi  ten  or  twenty  for  one. — //  this  be  true,  then  what 
fuch  mighty  help  is  this  to  our  great  Parifoes,  what  colour  or  pretence  is  there 
from  the  largenefs  of  them,  that  he  Jhould  preach  to  the  very  fame  men  that  come 
to  our  Church. — Then  how  come  they  to  be  lawful  when  few  or  none  ofthofe  many 
thoufands  ever  come. — to  fpeakjojtly  this  pretence  is  not  becoming  Mr.  Baxters 
Sincerity. 

u4n[.  what  hope  of  Juflicefrom  fuch  Judges  ?  Or  what  hope  of  profi- 
ting fuch  Readers  by  Difpute,  as  cannot  anfwer  fuch  as  this  themfelves. 
When  I  began  to  preach  at  St.  James's  the  neighbours  aflured  me,  that 
many  of  the  hearers  had  been  at  no  Church  of  four  years ;  but  they  were 
Members  of  the  PariuVChurch,  and  that  fome  of  them  got  into  the 
Church,  but  rarely  :  and  fome  liked  it  not  fo  well  as  to  be  forward  feek- 
ers.     When  I  was  driven  thence,  I  preached  a  while  where  MxWadfworth 
was  in  Southward  There  were  fome  people  that  had  adhered  to  their  old 
ejected  worthy  Paftor,and  fome  that  I  knew  not.  Since  then  I  preach  once 
on  the  Lords  day  in  another  mans  Pulpit,  as  near  St.  James's  as  I  could, 
and  the  fame  perfons  that  heard  me  there  do  (many  of  them)  come  hither, 
and  fome  others:  of  all  whom  I  know  very  few,  but  by  report.    On 
Thurfdays  I  preach  a  Lecture  in  another  mans  Pulpit  to  perfons  of  whom 
I  know  not  many  :  but  report  faith,  that  fome  of  them  joyn  not  ordi- 
narily with  the  Parifh  Minifters,  and  fome  do,  and  moft  judge  it  lawful, 
and  fometime,  but  feldom  pradlife  it  .•  And  thofe  are  of  two  forts :  fome 
that  prefer  the  Nonconforming  Miniftry,  and  fome  that  finding  the  Pa- 
rifh Churches  crowded,  and  many  prefentare  out  of  hearing,  do  feldom 
go  thither,  though  they  are  of  the  Parifh  Churches,  and  diffent  not  from 
their  Miniftry  or  Worfhip ;  fome  fay  [we  have  no  Seats  and  cannot  ftandQ 
fome  fay  [we  cannot  hear  the  Mnifter :  ]  fome  fay,  Thonfands  ft  ay  away  that 
can  get  no  room.and  will  go  no  whither  elfeyand  when  we  can  go  elfewhere,  we  wiX 
not  crowdinfirft-  to  kgep  them  out,  thatfo  much  need      Others  muft  be  out  if  we 
be  in.     Thefe  are  your  own  Church-Members :  they  hear  you  fometimes, 
but  feldom.     Others  that  hear  you  conftantly  on  the  Lords  days,  will 
think  that  a  Sermon  on  the  week  days  may  be  needful  to  them  whatever 
you  think  or  fay  againft  it.    And  is  it  mconfiftem  with  Sincerity  here  to  plead 
the  peoples  neceffity.    It's  well  that  our  Sincerity  is  not  to  ftand  or  fall  to 
your  judgment.     Did  I  fay  that  my  hearers  are  conftant  hearers  in  your 
Churches  *  Can  you  perfwade  the  World,while  you  deny  not  that  half  or  a 
quarter  of  your  own  Parifh  cannot  hear  you  (much  lefs  many  greater  Pa- 
rifhesj  that  if  fome  of  them  do  but  fometimes  crowd  in,  perhaps  once 
in  many  months  or  weeks,  by  coming  with  the  firft,  and  do  but  dwell  iu 
the  Parifh  and  own  you,  that  they  have  no  need  to  hear  or  worfhip  God 

L  publickly 


C/4] 


publickly  all  the  reft  of  the  year,  and  to  pretend  fuch  need  becometk  not 
Sincerity. 

2.  And  as  to  thofe  that  meet  in  lefler  Parifhes,  you  thought  not  meet 
to  take  notice  of  my  anfwer,  afligning  many  Reafons,  which  I  will  not  re- 
peat, any  further  than  to  tell  you.  i .  That  many  Churches  there  are  un- 
built. 2.  Many  come  from  the  greater  Parilhes  to  them :  and  fome  have 
other  Reafons. 

Sett.  15.  P.  102.  HQ&ith[Mr.Baxterbathawhole Chapter  (Vkap.i^i.) 
tf  Reafons  againft  the  Communion  of  Laymen  with  our  Church."]  Anfw.  You 
are  unhappy  in  Hiftory,  though  it  be  your  ftrength.  There's  not 
a  word  to  prove  it  unlawful  for  Laymen  to  have  Communion  with  your 
Churches,  but  only  the  Matter  of  Fad:  named,  which  is  fuppofed  to  the 
Controverfie-,  But  it  being  cunningly  worded  by  you,  it  may  be  by  [Rea- 
fons againft  Communion  with  our  Churches^]  you  meant  but  as  I  did  ( Reafons 
for  Nonconformity  in  thofe  particular  Atts :  )  But  do  you  not  your  felf  all-a- 
Jong  fuppofe  and  plead,  that  though  we  conform  not,  yet  we  fhould 
hold  Communion  with  you.  Why  call  you  then  the  Reafons  of  Noncon- 
formity, Reafons  againft  Communion. 

Sett.  16.  P.  103.  He  adds  [in  the  fame  Books  he  faith y  it  is  Schif- 
maticalin  a  Church  to  deny  Baptifm  without  the  tranfient  Sign  of  the  Crojs, 
erforwant  of  God- father S)  &C.  or  to  deny  Communion  to  fuch  who  fcruple  kneel- 
ing. Now  if  the  Church  be  Schifmatical,  then  thofe  who  feperate  in  thefe  things 
are  not. 

Anfw.  1.  Say  yon  fo  !  Then  we  are  not  only  quit,-  but  further  quit 
than  we  can  own  our  felves.     I  undertake  to  prove  that  it  may  be  Schifm 
to  feparate  from  a  Church  that  is  guilty  of  fome  Schifmatical  Acts  and  Im- 
pofitions.     And  it  needs  no  proof,  but  the  plain  Hiftory,  and  their  Ac- 
cu&tions  of  one  another  ;  that  there  are  few,  if  any  Churches  on  Earth 
that  are  not  guilty  of  fomewhat  that  is  Schifmatical,  in  Eaft0  Weft^North 
or  South,  in  Africk,  Afia,  Europe  or  America  \  Greeks,  Mufcovites^  Jaco- 
bites, Abaflines,  Neftorians,  Armenians,  Georgians,  Mengrelians,  Cir- 
caffians,  Papifts,  Lutherans,  Calvinifts,  Prelaticalls,  Presbyterians,  In- 
dependants,  Anabaptifts,  &c.    And  muft  we  feparate  from  them  all. 
2.  Verily  Sir,  denying  Perfons,  Chrifiendom  and  Church-Communion  are 
great  things.     And  if  a  Crofi  and  a  gefture  forbidden  by  the  Ancient  Coun- 
cils in  Adoration  every  Lords  Day,  be  now  matters  fo  weighty,  as  for 
them  to  deny  Chriftendome  and  Communion,for  fhame  call  them  Indifferent 
no  more :  one  would  verily  think  that  when  you  writ  your  Defence  of 
Archbifhop  Laud  you  nad  been  of  another  mind,if  words  are  any  notifying 
Signs  of  your  mind.    3.  Other  Paftors  may  be  ufed,  in  fuch  inftances 

without 


without  feparating  from  you,  Sir  thefe  are  not  impoflibilities  to  peacea- 
ble men.  In  both  the  places  where  I  formerly  preached,  a  publicly  Mi- 
nifter  and  a  frivate  lovingly  joy n  as  afliftan ts,  one  doing  that  part  which  the 
other  cannot.  And  they  all  live  in  peace. 

Seft.  *  7.  I  am  next  aflaulted  Pag.  1  \o<  I  fay  [The  Benefit  of  Chriftian 
Love  and  Concord  may  make  it  be  ft,  for  certain  feafonsy  to  joyn  even  in  defective 
Modes  of  Worftnp,  as  Chrift  did,  &C.  though  the  leaft  defective  muft  be  chofen 
when  no  fitch  Reafons  fw  ay  the  other  way.~\  Reader,  is  not  this  true  ?  Will 
not  the  deny al  of  this  drive  us  from  the  Parifh  Churches,  and  from  almoft 
all,  or  require  us  caufelefly  to  choofe  fins  of  omiffion.  Would  you  not  take 
him  for  a  feparatift  that  is  againft  this.  But  he  faith  [_Jnd  hence  we  take  no- 
tice 1.  That  no  Obligation  to  the  Peace  and  Vnity  of  this  Church  as  they  arc 
Members  of  it,  doth  bring  them  to  this  occafional  Communion  with  it\  but  a  certain 
Romantick.  Fancy  of  Catholick  Vnity  by  which  thefe  Catholickfientlemen  thinly 
themfelves  no  more  obliged  to  the  Communion  of  this  Church,  then  of  the  Arme- 
nian or  Abiffine  Churches  :  Only  it  happens  that  our  Church  is  fo  much  nearer. 

Anfw.  1.  This  is  not  true  :  For  1.  we  take  this  Church  to  be  far  left 
corrupt  than  the  Armenian  or  Abiffme.  2.  We  have  more  Obligations  to 
it  from  the  civil  Magistrates,  Laws  and  Protection,  &c.  2.  Is  nearnefs 
fuch  a  trifle  with  you.  How  much  do  you  differ  from  Mr.  Che ny.  Tell  us, why 
wefhould  be  of  your  Parifh  Church  rather  than  of  one  an  hundred  miles  of£ 
but  for  nearnefs  and  Cohabitation  •,  wby  elfe  of  old  had  each  City  its  own 
Church  ?  3 .  If  Catholick,  Vnity  become  a  Romantick  Fancy.  Is  this  the  fame 
man  that  wrote  the  Defence  of  Archbifhop  Laud,  we  are  not  afhamed  of 
the  title  of  Catholick.  4.  If  I  name  one  Obligation  to  Communion  with 
you,  is  it  a  learned  Note  to  gather  that  I  deny  all  other  ?  5.  When  prove 
you  that  I  am  only  for  occafional  Communion  when  I  have  fo  long  prattifed 
conftant  Communion  with  you?  Thefe  are  reafons  fuitable  to  your  caufe. 

Sell.  1 8.  He  adds  [_As  k  him  what  Church  he  is  a  Member  of:  If  he  anfwer,  he 
could  have  occafional  Communion  with  all  tolerable  Churches, but  waLofixed Mem- 
ber of  none,  would  they  (if  he  were  at  Jerufalem)  take  fuch  a  manfor  a  Chri- 
ftian ?  What  ?  a  Chriftian  and  a  Member  of  no  Church.  And  I  much  doubt  whe- 
ther they  would  admit  J uch  an  one  to  occafional  Communion^&c.  Anfw.  1 .  Won- 
derful !  Who  would  have  thought  that  this  man  had  been  fo  much  for  the 
Principles  of  Separation  (more  than  the  Independants)  In  his  defence  of 
Laud  he  maintaineth  that  the  Power  of  the  Keys  it  formally  in  the  whole  Church , 
and  given  to  Peter  as  their  Reprefentative  ( wrhich  is  not  true,  for  it  was  given 
only  to  Paftors  as  fuch  and  not  to  the  Laity.)  And  now  he  would  make 
that  man  no  Chriftian  that  is  no  fixed  Member  of  fome  particular  Church. 
Let  us  examine  whether  this  be  true. 

L  3  Chap." 


CHAP.    V  L 


Q^  Whether  he  be  no  Christian  that  is  not  a  fixed  Member  of 

a  particular  Church  * 

Sett.  i.  TJE  that  is  a  true  Member  of  the  Univerfal  Church,  which 
fl    is  Chrifts  Body,  is  a  true  Chriftian  :    But  many  are 
Members  of  the  Univerfal  Church,  which  are  no  fixed  Members  of  any 
particular  Church.    Ergo. 

2.  All  that  are  rightfully  Baptized  are  Chriftians,  (for  it  is  their  Chri- 
fteningj  But  many  rightfully  Baptized  are  no  fixed  Members  of  any  particular 
Church.     Ergo, 

3.  He  that  hath  all  the  Eflentials  of  Chriftianity  is  a  Chriftian  :  But 
many  that  are  no  fixed  Members  of  a  particular  Church  have  all  the  Effen- 
tials  of  Chriftianity.     Ergo. 

4.  Afoniore,  They  thai;  are  not  fomuch  as  bound  in  Duty  to  be  fixed 
Members  of  a  particular  Church,  though  Baptifed,  are  not  unchriften- 
ed  for  want  of  fuch  Memberfhip.  But  many  Baptized  perfon  are  not  fo 
much  as  bound  in  Duty  to  be  fixed  Members  of  a  particular  Church. 
Ergo.  Inftances. 

1.  The  Eunuch  baptized  in  his  Travails  Atts.  9,  was  only  a  Mem- 
ber of  the  Church  Univerfal.  2.  Thofethat  were  converted  by  Frumen- 
tim  and  Edefws  when  there  was  no  particular  Church  ;  And  all  that  are 
firft  converted  in  any  Infidel  or  Heathen  Land  before  any  Church  be  for- 
med. 3.  Thofe  that  by  Shipwrack  are  caft  on  heathen  Countries  where 
no  Churches  are.  4.  Travellers  that  go  from  Country  to  Countries  (as 
Lythgow  did  nineteen  years,  and  others  many.)  And  I  think  he  unhap- 
pily named  Jerufalem,  where  Travellers  come  that  are  of  no  fixed  Church 
(unlefs  he  in  that  alfo  be  a  Superindependant,  and  think  that  men  may 
be  many  years  Members  of  a  Church  many  hundred  miles  off,  which  they 
have  noperfonal  communion  with./  %.  Merchants  and  Faclors,  who  are 
called  to  dwell  long  among  Infidels  where  are  no  Churches.  6.  Embaf- 
fadors  who  by  their  Princes  are  fent  to  refide  among  fuch,  much  of  their 
lives.  7.  Wanderers  that  have  no  fixed  habitations ,  as  many  Pedlers 
and  other  poor  wandering  Tradefmen,  and  loofe  Beggars  that  have  no 
Dwelling.  8.  Thofe  thot  live  among  Papifts  or  any  other  Chriftians 
whoimpofe  fome  fin  as  a  condition  of  communion.  9.  Thofe  that  live 
among  fuch  Chriftians  as  have  no  true  Paftors  who  are  conftitutive  parts 

*     of 


i77l 

Of  particular  Churches.  Some  being  incapable  through  infuffidency,fon:c 
by  Herefie  and  ibme  for  want  of  a  true  Call :  Such  as  by  Mr  Dodwelh 
Doctrine  moft  of  the  Chriftian  World  are,  for  want  of  uninterrupted 
rrue  Epifcopal  Ordination,  i  o.  Thofe  who  are  fubjects  to  fuch  as  per- 
mit them  not  to  be  fixed  Members.-  As  Wives  hindred  by  Husbands, 
Children  by  Parents,  and  fome  Subjects  violently  hindred  by  Princes  *, 
who  yet  allow  them  tranfient  Communion.  And  verily  a  man  would  think 
by  the  writings  of  many  Confor mifts,  that  they  took  it  for  a  Duty  to  o- 
bey  a  Prince  in  fuch  a  cafe,  j  i .  Thofe  who  live  where  Church-corrup- 
tions are  not  fo  great  as  to  make  tranfient  Communion  unlawful,  but  (b 
great  as  to  make  fixed  communion  feem  to  be  a  culpable  confent ;  If  I 
come  in  travel  to  a  Church  of  Strangers,  I  am  not  bound  to  examine  what 
their  Difciflme  is,  what  their  Lives  be,  or  how  their  Fafiors  are  c Ailed  : 
But  where  I  am  fixed  I  am  more. bound  to  know  thefe,  and  if  I  find  them 
exclude  Difcipline,  live  wickedly,  and  have  unlawful  Pallors,  I  may  in 
fome  cafes  be  a  partaker  of  the  fin  if  I  fix  among  them.  12.  They  that  live 
•inatimeandplaceof  Schifm  and  diffraction,  driving  who  (hall  prevail, 
and  condemning  each  other,  all  follovungfeveral  Factions,  and  needing 
Reconcilers :  it  may  for  a  time  become  in  prudence  the  duty  of  peace- 
makers, to  own  no  Faction,  nor  to  be  more  of  one  Church  than  of  a- 
nother,  while  he  feeth  that  it  will  do  more  hurt  than  good  •-,  And  thp fe 
that  wait  in  hope  as  the  Nonconformifts  now  do,  to  fee  whether  their 
Rulers  will  reftore  them  to  reformed  Pari(h  Churches,  may  at  once  in 
prudence  find  it  needful,neither  to  fix  as  Members  in  fome  Parifh  Churches 
till  reformed  (in  the  Teachers  at  lead)  nor  to  feem  to  beSeparatifts  by 
gathering  new  Churches.  In  none  of  all  thefe  cafes  isamanunchriftened, 
nor  fchifmatical,  for  being  no  fixed  member  ot  any  Church  befides  the 
Univerfal.  And  as  it  is  the  ill  hap  of  thefe  men  commonly  to  ftrike 
themfelves,  I  doubt  they  will  prove  Gmwahimfdf  no  Cbriftian,  by  this 
Rule ,  who  for  many  years  before  he  died  ,  they  fay  joyned  with 
no  particular  Church,  as  a  fixed  member.  And  I  know  not  well  what 
particular  Church  they  make  the  King  a  Member  of. 

Seel.  2.  To  his  Queftions  Pag.  3.  \jVcre  we  -not  B.zptizc  I  into  this  Church, 
and  do  you  not  denounce  Memberjlnp  ?  This  U  fiarce  a  civility.  I  anfwer, 
1.  This  Church  !  which  Church  do  you  mean  ?  I  was  not  Baptized  into 
St.  Gi/w'snor  St.  Andrews  Parifh  Church,  but  into  one  above  an  hundred 
milesoff,  andyetmy  removal  made  me  no  culpable  Scpararift.  Or  doth 
he  mean,  This  Viocefan  Church  ?  No  •,  I  was  Baptized  in  the  Diocefs  of 
Lichfield.  Doth  he  mean  This  National  Church  \  as  it  is  fuppofed  a  po- 
litical body  conftituted  of  the  Ecclefialtical  Governing  and  Governed 

Parts 


£78] 

Parts,  he  faith  there  is  no  fiich  Church  of  England }  but  that  It  inferreth 
Popery  to  aflert  fuch.  But  if  he  equivocate  here,  and  mean  not  by  a 
Church  as  in  the  reft,  but  either  a  chriflian  Kingdom,  or  an  agreeing  Affo- 
ciationof  many  Churches,  lam  ftill  a  fixed  member  of  fuch  a  Kingdom, 
and  of  fuch  an  AfTociation  in  all  things  neceffary  to  Churches  and  Chri- 
ftian  Communion.  2.  But  Baptifm  as  fuch  entred  me  only  into  the  Uni- 
verfal  Church  •,  much  lefs  did  it  fix  me  in  any  other.  I  was  Baptized 
where  I  was  to  ftay  but  a  little  while.  And  this  phrafe  of  {being  Bap- 
tized into  our  Church^}  is  to  me  of  ill  found  or  intimation.  Bellarmine  faith 
that  all  that  are  baptized  are  interpretatively  thereby  engaged  to  the  Pope : 
I  was  baptized  in  aParifh,  and  in  a  Diocefs,  and  in  a  Chriflian  Kingdom ; 
but  not  lb  into  them,  as  to  be  obliged  to  continue  under  that  Prieft  or 
Bifhop  or  in  that  Kingdom.  And  my  Baptifm  I  hope  did  not  oblige  me 
to  every  Canon,  Ceremony,  Form ,  or  Sin  of  the  aflbciated  Churches 
in  England,  abufively  by  him  called  one  Church.  3 .  And  unhappily  it  is  not 
meer  Independancy  that  he  is  ftill  pleading  for,  but  fome  extremes  which 
the  moderate  Independants  difclaim,  viz..  That  a  member  of  their 
Churches  is  fb  tyed  to  them,  that  they  may  not  remove  to  another  with- 
out their  confent.  And  am  I  fo  tyed  ?  to  what,  to  Parochial,  or  to  the 
Diocefan,  or  to  theaffociation  of  Englifn  Churches.  If  it  had  been  tothc 
Sphies,  I  would  fain  know  whether  their  things  called  by  them  Indiffe- 
r*ffttfpecifiethem. 

Sett.  3.  P.  hi,  112.  He  yet  more  pleads  as  for  Separation  [why 
then  above  once  or  twice  ?  why  Should  I  fo  countenance  defethive  Worfhip  and 
not  rather  reprove  it  by  total  forbearance  of  Communion,"]  &c.  j4nfw» 
My  Reafons  I  told  him,  becaufe  the  accidents  may  continue  which  made 
it  a  Duty,  but  I  cannot  hinder  others  from  yielding  to  his  arguments : 
Let  him  make  his  beft  of  them.  Only  I  muft  tell  him  yet  1 .  that  if  he  lay 
his  caufe  on  this,  that  their  Parochial  or  Diocefan  Ch  urches  are  not  de- 
fective. 2.  Or  that  the  defetts  cannot  by  others  be  avoided,  he  will  quite 
marr  his  matter,  and  undo  all  by  overdoing.  3.  And  if  he  indeed  think 
that  all  defective  Churches  muft  be  forfaken,  he  will  be  one  of  the  great- 
eft  Schifmaticks  in  the  World.  But  who  can  reconcile  this  with  the 
fcopeof  his  whole  Book? 

SeB.  4.  P.  1 1 2.Hejfaith,  Here  are  no  bounds  fet  to  peoples  Fancies  of  purer 
Mminiftrations.dnfw.UMG  I  fo  oft  and  copioufly  named  the  bounds,and  now 
is  the  anfwer,  \Jiere  are  none."]  Are  there  none  in  all  the  fame  Books 
he  citeth  ?  2.  Scripture  is  their  bounds,  as  he  well  openeth  in  his  de- 
fence  of  Biihop  Laud. 

Scft.-$.  P.  114.  He  complains  of  my  leaving  out  the  belt  part  of 

hi? 


l79l 

his  argument,  viz.  [The  people  may  go  to  the  Anabaptifts  and  Quaksrsl 
Anfw.  Ates  that  fuch  things  fhould  be  the  beft  to  fuch  a  man!  By  [May 
go~]  you  mean,  i.  lawfully,  2.  or  eventually^  3.  or  for  want  of  due  hindring.J 
The  Reader  may  think  that  you  by  Calumny  father  the  firfton  me,  as  if 
I  faid,  that  fo  to  go  to  the  Quakers  were  no  fin,  whereas  I  ftil]  fay  that 
if  they  do  but  leave  your  Churches  by  any  culpable  Error  it  is  their  fin; 
2.  And  as  to  the  Event ,  many  not  only  may  but  doy  turn  Quakers, 
Papifts  and  Athiefts,  3.  And  as  to  the  third,  it's  all  the  queftion  here 
(not  whether  we  fhould  feek  to  fave  them  but)  which  is  the  true  reafona- 
ble  and  allowed  means,  Whether  it  be  the  Patrons  choofing  for  all  Eng- 
land the  Paftors  to  whofe  care  they  muft  truft  their  Souls,  and  laying  them 
in  Jail  that  will  choofe  others  ?  Or  whether  there  be  not  a  righter  way; 
And  again  I  fay,  Kings  and  Patrons  choofe  not  mens  Wives,  or  Phyfi- 
cians,  or  Food,  and  every  man  hath  a  charge  of  his  Soul  as  well  as  of 
his  Life,  Antecedent  to  the  Kings  or  Patrons  charge- 

Sett.  6.  But  why  (faith  he  P.  11.  v»  115.)  muft  the  King  bear  all  the 
blame,  if mens  Souls  be  not  provided  for ,  &cl  Anfw.  He  that  is  th  2  choofe  r 
mult  bear  the  blame,  the  King  for  Bifhops,  and  the  Patrons  for  Parifh 
Priefts  if  they  mifchoofe.  And  do  you  think  in  your  confcience  that  all 
the  Patrons  in  England  of  fo  various  minds  and  lives,  are  like  to  choofe 
only  fuch,  in.whofe  paftoral  conduct  all  that  care  for  their  Souls  fhould 
reft.  Yea  though  the  Bifhops  muft  Inftitute  them  as  they  Ordained  them. 
When  we  heretofore  told  them  of  the  multitudes  of  grofly  ignorant, 
drunken  Prieft,  their  anfwers  were,  1.  Their  Chaplains  examined  thenv 
2.  They  had  certificates.  3 .  A  quare  impedit  lay  againft  them  if  they  re- 
quired higher  knowledge  than  to  anfwer  the  Catechifm  in  Latine.  And 
now  experience  will  not  warrant  us  to  know  what  fuch  men  are.  P.  1 1 5.  He 
asketh  How  it  is  poffible  on  thefe  terms  to  have  any  peace  or  order  in  an  efta- 
bitted  Church.  Anfw*  1  have  fully  told  him  how  in  a  whole  Book  of  con- 
cord, And  hath  their  way  caufed  greater  peace  and  order?  Yes,  tothem- 
felves  for  the  time.  So  Popery  keepeth  fome  Order  and  Unity  with 
them  that  hold  to  it :  But  it  kept  not  the  Greeks  or  Proteftants  from 
forfaking  them. 

Se&*  7.  P.  119.  120.  He  faith,  [They  only  look^onthofea*  true  Church^ 
es  which  have  fuch  Faftors  whom  they  approve.  Anfw.  Equivocal  words  : 
i.  If  they  approve  not  thofe  whom  they  fliould  approve,  it  is  their  fin. 
2.  approving  is  either  of  the  necejfaries  ad  effect  only  ad  melius  effe.  They 
muft  not  put  the  later  for  the  former.  3.  Approving  is  by  a  Governing 
or  but  a  difceming  private  Judgment.  The  firft  they  have  not,  but  the 
later.    In  good  eameft,  woulcThe  have  all  the  people  take  thofe  for  true 

Paftors, 


[8o] 

Paftors,  who  they  verily  think  are  none.  Can  they  at  once  hold  con- 
tradictions? And  if  they  muft  not  judge  as  diffenters,  what  meaneth 
Mr.  DodmU  and  fuch  mens  Arguments  to  prove  all  no  Minifters  that 
have  not  Succeffion  of  Epifcopal  Ordination  ?  Muft  not  the  people  on 
that  account  difown  them,  by  his  way  ? 

Setl.  8.  p.  t  19.  He  brings  in  againft  us  my  words  [7  take  thofe  for 
true  Churches  that  have  true  Paftors,  and  thofe  for  none,  that  have  1 .  Men 
nncapable  of  the  Pafioral  Office ,   2.  or  not  truly  called  to  it,  3.  Or  that  deny 
thcmfelves  the  effential  Power.     Anfw.  He  knoweth  that  I  fpeak  not  of  e- 
quivocal  but  proper  political  Churches.     And  is  it  poflible  that  fuch  a 
man  (hould  dhTent  in  this  ?    1.  Can  he  be  a  true  P  aft  or  that  is  uneatable  of 
the  Office  ?  Shall  I  abufe  time  to  confute  grofs  Contradictions  ?  Or  if  he 
be  a  profeft  Infidel ,  Can  he  be  a  Chriftian  Paftor  ?  2.  Is  a  Layman  a 
true  Paftor  that  is  not  truly  called  to  it  ?  why  then  do  they  argue  as  Mr. 
Dodvoell  ?  or  Re-ordain  men.     3.  Can  a  man  be  a  Paftor  againft  his  will, 
or  that  confenteth  not,  but  renounceth  it.?  or  can  that  be  a  true  Pafto- 
ral  Church  that  hath  no  Paftor  ?  Verily  we  are  but  upon  low  works,  if 
thefe  be  the  things  which  we  muft  prove. 

Setl.   9.  He  adds,  \_And  one  or  other  of  thefe  he  thinkj  mufty  if  not  all 
the  parochial  Churches  in  England  fall  under. ~]     Anfw.  1  read  thefe  words 
of  the  Dr.  toaPapift,  [To  fpeak^mtldly,  this  is  a  grofs  untruth.~\  There- 
fore I  hope  it  were  no  Rage  for  me  to  have  faid  the  like.  How  doth  he 
prove  it  ?  Nay  in  the  place  cited  by  him  1  not  only  profeft  the  contrary, 
but  gave  the  Reafon,  p.  65.  [Becaufe  I  judge  of  their  Office  by  Gods  Word, 
and  not  by  the  Kule  which  deprives  them  of  an  effential  tart."}  And  1 .  He 
citeth  my  confeflion  that  thofe  that  I  hear  preach  well  (and  therefore 
are  not  uncapable  men.J     2.  That  their  Ordination  hath  all  efTentially 
necefTary,  and  all  the  worthy  men  that  I  know  have  the  communicants 
of  the  Parifhes  confent,  though  not  Eledtion,  and  therefore  are  called, 
3.  And  many  of  them  (as  he)  thinks  they  have  allelTential  to  the  Office 
and  difown  it  not,  though  I  think  others  deny  it  them,  where  there  is 
the  truth  of  what  he  faith. 

Sett.  10.  f.  120.  Becaufe  my  prattice  dilproveth  him,  he  finds  out  a 
Subtilty,  that  Ijoyn  not  with  the  Farifh  Churches  at  true  Churches ,  but  only 
ai  Chappels  or  Oratories — he  account  snot  our  parochial  Churches  as  true  Churches, 
nor  doth  communicate  with  them  as  fuch — a  Subtilty  beyond  the  reach  of  the  old 
Brownifts.  Anfw.  Deliberately  to  print  fuch  untruths  feems  tolera- 
ble in  him,  but  to  fay  they  are  fuch  would  feem  paffion  in  me,  and  what  o- 
ther  anfwer  are  they  capable  of  ?— What  I  exprefly  fay  of  the  three  fore- 
mentioned  excepted  forts,  he  feigneth  me  to  fay  of  all  or  moft  of  the 

Parifh 


[8i] 

Parifn  Churches  •,  and  yet  dare  not  deny  the  truth  of  any  one  of  the  Ex- 
ceptions, i .  Do  not  all  thofe  men  take  the  Parifhes  for  no  proper  political 
Churches,  but  only  for  Parts  of  the  Diocefan  Church,  fucb  as  we  call  Curates 
Chappels,  who  fay  that  a  Biftop  is  a  conftitntive  Part  of  a  true  political 
Church  andentereth  the  Definition,  and  that  it's  no  C  "hath  no 

Bifhop,  and  that  Diocefan  Churches  are  the  loweft  political.  And  do  I 
need  to  tell  him  how  confiderable  thefe  men  are ;  .2.  Doth 

he  bimfelf  take  any  one  of  thefe  for  a  true  political  Church  ?  When  I  . 
young,  divers  Laymen  by  turns  were  ou:  publick  Reading  Teachers :  A- 
mong  the  reft  one  was  after  proved  to  counterfeit  Or  ders.     This  mans  acts 
were  no  nullities  to  us  that  knew  it  not :  but  when  we  knew  of  fuch  m 
we  take  them  for  true  Paftors.and  it  for  a  true  Church? 

Sect.  11.  p.  22 1.  He  faith,  \_Arty  Parochial  Church  that  hath  fuch  a  one  (a 
Bijhep  or  P  aft  or  over  them  that  hath  the  power  of  the  Keys,  and  owns  it  felfrojbe 
Independent)  he  allows  to  be  a  true  Church  aid  none  elf e.~\  A  fv.  More  and 
more  untruths.  1.  Where  do  I  fay  \jb*t  owns  it  felf to  be  Independent ,]  as 
if  that  were  necefiary  to  its  being.  1.  Doth  he  not  con fefs  that  I  own  general 
Vifitors  or  Archbifhops  and  appeals  ?  2  That  I  own  Affociations  which  he 
*makes  the  Hate  of  the  Church  of  England?  3  .That  I  own  Synods  for  obliging 
concord?4.  That  I  own  the  Magistrates  Government  of  ail  ?  Is  there  no  de- 
pendancy  in  any  of  thefe,  or  all  ?  what  dependancy  more  doth  he  alPert?  2+ 
As  to  the  Power  ot  the  Keys,  dare  he  come  into  the  light  and  tell  us,  whether 
any  power  of  the  Keysjhat  is,of  the  Government  of  his  particular  Church  be 
eflential  to  the  Pallor  of  a  true  organized  governed  Church  or  not.  If  not, 
is  it  not  a  contradiction  to  call  it  a  governed  Church  ?  If  yea  then  is  he  a  Pa- 
ftor  that  wants  what  is  effential  to  a  Paftor  ?  But  if  they  will  call  *  forcing 
Power,  or  the  prefent  fecular  Mode  of  their  Courts,  by  the  name  of  the 
Keys,  L  never  faid  that  thefe  are  eflential  to  a  Church,"  nor  defirable  in  it, 
but  am  a  Nonconformift  becaufe  I  will  not  by  Oath  or  Covenant  renounce 
(joftj  Endeavours  to  amend  it. 

Sett.  11.  p.  I2is  122.  The  next  A  collation  is,  [They  leave  it  in  the  peoples 
Power  notwith ft anding  all  legal  Eftabliflments  to  own  or  difown  whom  they  judje 
ftt.~\  Anfw.  Hetireth  me  with  putting  me  on  repetitions.  1.  They  can 
unjuftly  judge  of-none  and  difown  them  without  fin.  It  is  not  I  that  give  men 
power  to  fin,  nomorethanPw*rf0^>,orbey?cfc,  which  is  but  impotency : 
would  I  could  give  them  power  againft  it.  2.  It  is  not  power  to  reject  any 
chofen  by  King  or  Patrons,  from  being  publick  Teachers,  or  to  have  the 
Tithes  and  Temples,  nortobeaPaftortoothers.  But  it  is  to  have  a  dif- 
cermng  Judgment  whether  one  chofen  by  the  Patron  be  a  perfon  to  whom  he 
himfelf  ought  to  trull  the  paltoral  Conduct  of  his  Soul.     Either  the  Dr. 

M  thinks 


O] 

thinks  that  Laymen  have  this  difcerning  power  and  duty  or  not.  If  yea, 
is  it  nothing  to  him  to  feem  thus  feriouily  to  plead  againft  his  confeience  f 
If  not,  Iaskhim,  t.  What  meant  Chrift  and  his  Apoftles  to  call  men  to 
beware  of  falfe  Teachers,  to  avoid  the  Leven  of  their  Doctrine,  to  mark 
them  and  avoid  them,  and  turn  away  from  them,  and  not  bid  them  good 
ipeed.?  2.  What  meant  all  the  ancient  Churches  to  forbid  Communion  with 
Hereticks  ?  and  even  fome  Popes  and  Councils  to  hear  Mafs  of  Fornicators ?■ 
3.  W7hat  meant  all  thofe  Fathers  and  Councils,  that  make  himnoBilhop 
that  cometh  not  in  with  the  peoples  confent  ?  if  not  Election.  4.  Why 
will  he  not  be  intreated  to  tell  us  in  what  Countries, or  with  what  Limitati- 
ons the  contrary  Doctrine  muft  be  received  ?  Muft  all  the  people  truft  on- 
lyfuchPaftors  as  the  Prince  or  Patrons  choofe  all  over  England?  or  alfo  in 
Ireland^  Trance^  Spain,  Italy, Germ  any,  among  Lutherans,  CaIvinifts,Greeks, 
ehr.fiippofing  the  Law  be  on  that  fide?  Muft  we  all  be  of  the  Kings  or  Patrons 
Religion  ?  5.  Is  this  agreeable  to  his  old  Doctrine  cited  Chap.  j. 

Sett.  1  3.  p.  122.  He  adds,  fMr.  Baxter  [peaks  his  mind  very  freely  a- 
gainft  the  Rights  and  Patronage,  and  the  Power  of  the  Magiflrates  infuch  Cafes, 
and  pleads  for  the  unalterable  Rights  of  the  people,  as  the  old  Separatifls  did.  Anf 
Is  this  true  ?  1.  What  is  it  againft  the  Right  of  Patronage  or  Magiflrates 
Tower  for  me  to  choofe  who  I  will  trull  the  guidance  of  my  Soul  with, 
while  I  contradict  not  his  power  to  choofe  publick  Teachers,  and  give 
the  Tithes  and  Temples,  and  confefs  that  for  order  fake  I  ought  to  confent 
to  fuch  as  he  choofeth  thus,  unlefs  he  put  on  me  a  true  necelfity  of  a  better 
choice.?  If  the  Ring  choofe  all  the  HofpitalPhyficians,' what  wrong  is  it  to- 
him,  if  I  at  my  own  charge  choofe  a  better  for  my  felf  when  I  think  elfe 
ignorance  or  malice  will  murder  me  ?  Doth  he  that  defireth  (as  I  ever  doj 
that  in  fo  great  a  cafe  there  may  be  many  Locks  to  the  Church  Door,  deny 
any  one  of  them,  viz,.  The  O/dainers  confent,  the  Magiflrates  and  Patronsr 
and  the  Peoples.  Is  this  the  fame  that  the  old  Separatifts  did  ?  Should 
Cloccficr  take  Goodman  a  Papift  for  their  Bifhop  becaufe  the  King  chofe  him? 
Abundance  of  Patrons  in  thebeginning  of  Q^EUz.abeths  Reign  prefented 
Papiits.  It  feems  if  they  were  impofed  by  Law,  and  Patrons,  you  would 
have  the  people  fubmit  to  thofe  that  cry  down  Bilhops,  Liturgy  and  Ce- 
remonies too.  Father  Paul  Sarpi  tramlated  by  Dr.  Demon  will  tell  you 
how  new  a  way  this  is. 

Sett.  14.  p.  122.  He  adds  [fthe  People  are  made  Judges  of  the  Competency 
of  their  Mnifters?^  Anfxt.  They  are  difcerning  Judges.  Doth  not  your  charge 
imply  that -you  think  otherwife  5  and  yet  you  dare  not  fay  fo.  Muft  they 
not  judge  when  F  on  eigners  heretofore  were  fet  over  them,  whetherthey 
fpeak  Ecgtiffijor  no  ?  or  if  a  Socinian  deny  Chrifts  Godhead  or  the  im 

mortality 


_        C8j] 

mortality  of  the  Soul,  whether  he  be  Competent  or  not  ?  Or  if  they  have 
an  ignorant  Curate,  that  when  necelfary  advice  for  the  Soul  is  asked  of  him, 
will  lay  no  more  but  [Trouble  not  your  head  about  fuch  matter s>  but  cafi away 
care  and  live  merrily \~]  If  when  the  blind  lead  the  blind  both  fall  into  the 
ditch,  mull  we  not  note  the  difference  ?  Alas  how  little  would  fome  men 
have  a  man  care  for  his  Soul,  in  comparifon  of  caring  what  Phyfick,  what 
Food,  what  Wife,  what  Servant,  what  Trade  he  choofeth  ?  Trull  one  to 
the  conduct  of  fuch  as  all  the  Patrons  of  England  wii\  choofe  for  you,  but 
not  any  of  the  other.  As  to  the  not  caufelefs  forftking  former  Pallors, 
he  knoweth  that  it  was  the  Uriel  charge  of  the  old  Canons  of  the  Churches ; 
and  the  Bilhops  themfelves  do  hold  the  fame.  1  thought  they  ought  not  to 
beforfakenbecaufementhruft  them  out.  The  Churches  at  Antioch,  Alex- 
andria, and  many  more  d  id  oft  and  long  cleave  to  thofe  Pallors  w  horn  the 
Chriflian  Emperors  call  out,and  rejecl:  thofe  whom  they  impofed.  When 
I  have  proved  this  fo  fully  in  my  firft  Flea  and  Church-  hi  [lory,  what  an  unfa- 
tisfattory  anfwer  is  it  for  fuch  a  Dr.  to  repeat  it  and  fay,  This  is  flam  deal- 
ing. Is  the  Judgment  and  Practice  of  the  Churches  fo  light  with  him. 

Seel.  15.  p.  123,  The  next  charge  is,  {They  give  directions  to  the  people 
what  fort  of Minifters  they  jhould  own,  and what  not.~\  Anfw*  Wedoib:  And 
I  had  thought  all  Chriftians  had  been  of  the  lame  mind.  It's  fad  with  the 
Church  when  this  Doctrine  needeth  apublick  defence.  Dare  be  fay,that  all 
impofed  mull  be  owned?  Then  either  Salvation  isattheMagiftrates  will, 
or  it's  the  priviledge  of  fuch  Countries  as  have  good  ones,or  a  man  may  be  fa- 
ved  in  any  Country  Religion  contrary  to  the  Article  which  they  allfubfcribe* 

Sett.  16.  Next  the  Accufer  falls  on  my  general  Rule,  [The  Miniflry 
that  tendeth  to  Deft  ruction  more  than  to  Edification  y  and  to  do  more  harm  than 
good,is  not  to  be  owned,~\  and  his  bare  recital  is  confutation.  Anf.  I  muft  pro- 
fefsthat  lam  fo  confident  of  this,that  athoufand  fuchdiflentingDrs.cannot 
change  me  :  And  according  to  his  excellent  Rules  of  judging  in  the  end  of 
his  Difcourfe  of  Idolatry,  which  maketh  natural  Verities  moft  certain 
and  fundamental,  me  thinks  it  fhould  to  him  be  furer  of  the  two  than 
theGofpelitfelf:  viz..  That  all  men  lhould  love  themfelves,  and  be  un- 
willing to  be  damned,  and  therefore  lhould  not  own  that  Miniflry  of  man 
which  tendeth  more  to  Deitrudlion  than  to  Edification.  And  when 
he  wrote  that  cited  in  my  firft  Chap,  he  was  of  that  mind  or  he  was  a  molt 
grofs  diflembler.  But  mull  it  be  otherwife  ?  Is  it  our  Salvation  that  we 
mull  facrifke  to  Priefts,  Prelates  or  Princes  wills  ?  If  our  Tithes  would 
have  ferved  them,  we  had  not  gainfaid  them.  If  our  Bodies  and  Ellates 
might  have  fatisfied  them,  wre  had  not  fluck  at  it  fo  much.  But  when 
(Deftruttion)  fignifieth  (Damnation)  it  is  .a  hard  bargain  ?  If  we  ihould  re- 

M  2  nouncc 


[84] 

liounce  our  Chriftianity  for  them,  we  are  never  the  nearer  :  for  we  are  Hill 
Men  and  therefore  loth  to  be  deflroyed  in  Hell?  Ifthisbethe  meaning  of 
the  Article  which  denyeth  freewill,  I  deny  it  freely  :  1  have  no  fuch /ra 
mil.  But  O  Reverend  Fathers,  be  more  impartial :  Are  you  fo  loth  to  iofe 
your  great  Riches  and  Honor,  yea  or  to  have  your  Reputation  fo  far  que- 
stioned, as  to  be  contradicted,  or  have  others  live  by  you  that  preach  with- 
out your  confent ;  and  yet  muft  all  the  people  of  England,  fo  much  deny 
their  own  Salvation  for  you,  as  to  fubmit  to  a  deftxoying  Miniftry ?  Why 
then  did  you  before  put  (agreement  in  Doctrine)  among  the  requisites  to 
our  Accufation  ?  muft  we  agree  and  not  judge  whether  we  agree  or  not  ? 
Why  then  mull  not  all  Hereticks,  Papifts,  &c.  be  received,  why  then  are 
all  your  voluminous  Accufations  produced  to  prove  us  jultly  filenced  ?  and 
Mr.DWiv^toproveusnoMiniftersofChrill,  if  we  want  nothing  but  a 
human  power  to  impofe  us  on  the  Churches,  and  a  Patron  to  prefent  us? 
But  the  beft  is,  when  you  have  tailed  and  written  your  worft,  men  will  be 
unwilling  of  deftruclion ;  and  till  the  Bible  be  forbidden,  men  will  read, 
(Beware  offalfe  Prophets  t   Let  no  man  deceive  you  :  prove  all  things  :  from  fitch 
turn  away  :  Markjhem  which  caufe  Divifions  and  Offences  contrary  to  the  doctrine 
whichyou  have  learned  and  avoid  them  ;and  more,2  Pet.z.J.Tit.  % .  I  o.  2.J.  10, 1 1 . 
Sett,  1 7 .  He  adds,  (  That  we  may  not  thinkall  this  to  be  only  a  RomantickScheme, 
or  Fiction,)  he  adds,  (that  they  are  not  able  to  confute  the  people  in  too  many  pla- 
ces, who  tell  them  that  their  pub  lick  Priefis  arefo  defective  in  their  neceffary  Qua" 
life  at  ions  for  their  Office,  as  that  they  hold  it  unlawful  to  own  fuch  for  true  Mini" 
fters,  and  to  encourage  them  by  their  pre  fence,  and  commit  the  care  of  their  Souls 
,  to  fuch.  Anf.    i .  This  is  true :  we  are  not  able  to  confute  them  :  If  you  be 
rejoice  in  your  Wifdom.  2.. .Either  you  would  have  us  believe  that  there 
are  none  fuch,  or  that  no  fuch  are  to  be  fo  refufed.  The  firft  you  attempt  not : 
If  you  did,  I  would  repeat  a  Catalogue  of  my  old  Teachers  and  Acquain- 
tance :  but  Ihave  named  them  to  Mr.  Hinkley.    And  as  to  the  fecond,  I 
prove  it  (a  fad  task  for  fuch  a  one  as  you  to  put  us  on.)  1 .  Such  as  are  known 
to  be  no  authorized  Minifter s  of  Chrift,  (hould  not  be  owned  as  fuch  :  But 
all  thofe  that  waat  the  nccefiary  Qualifications  for  their  Office  are  no  authori- 
zed Mini  ft  ers  of  Chrift.  Ergo.  If  the  Major  were  not  true,  Error  or  Ly- 
ing were  a  duty.  The  truth  of  the  Minor  is  evident  in  the  terms :  necef- 
far  turn  eft  fine  quo  res  non  effepoteft.  It  is  Qualifications  nece/fary  to  the  Office  in 
effe,  and  not  only  to  the  well  performance  that  is  mentioned.  Forma  nun- 
quam  recipitur  in  materiam  difpofitione  neceffariacarentem.   But  here  the  Of- 
fice is  the  forme,  and  the  neceffary  difpofitionof  the  matter  is  fuppofedwantingA 
Ergo.  Again  :;  All  men  are  bound  to  avoid  the  apparent  means  of  Dam- 
nation ;  To  truft  the  conduft  of  our  Souls  to  men  uncapable  for  want  of 

neceflary 


[85] 

neceflary  Qualifications,  is  an  apparent  means  of  Damnarion  (as  exclu- 
ding an  ordinarily  neceflary  means  of  Salvation,;  Ergo.  Again :   It  is  a 
great  fin  to  encourage  men  in  the  wilful  damning  of  their  own  Souls,  and 
hindering  the  Salvation  of  many  others :  But  to  own  an  unqualified  unca- 
pableman  as  a  Minifter  of  Chrift,  is  to  encourage  him  in  the  wilful  dam- 
nation of  himfelf  (by  his  prophane  undertaking^)  and  in  hindering  the 
falvation  of  many  others,  Ergo.  1  will  not  recite  what  Zcchary  and  other 
Prophets  fay  of  the  ufage  oi  falfe  pretenders  to  be  Prophets,  left  you 
mifapply  it.     Again :  No  man  ought  to  confent  to  the  prophane  fubvert- 
ingof  Chrift's  Church-Olfices  and  Ordinances :  But  to  confent  to  the  Mini- 
ftry  of  unqualified  uncapable  men,  is  to  confent  to  the  fubverting  of 
Chrift's  Church-Offices   and  Ordinances.     Ergo.     Can  your  patience 
endure  unqualified  men  in  the  Miniftry,and  cannot  endure  fuch  as  us  out  of 
Jail,becauie  we  obey  you  not  in  all  your  impofed Oaths, Words  andPradifes. 
Seel.    1 8.  Next  he  thus  confuteth  US,   (and  direclly  contrary  to  the  Prin- 
ciples of  the  old  Nonconformifis,  a*  appears  at  large  by  Mr.  Ball  faying  (If 
Can's  meaning  be  that  it  is  not  lawful  to  communicate  in  the  Workup  of  God 
with  Minifter s  not  fitly  qualified,  diforderly  called,  or  carelefly  executing  their 
Office,  it  is  directly  contrary  to  the  word  of  God,  found  Reafon,  and  confent  of 
all  the  Learned.  Anf  Who  would  have  thought  that  this  wrorthy  Doctor 
could  not  or  would  not  fee  a  difference,  between  (fitly  qualified]  as  ad  bene 
effie,  and  unqualified,  or  wanting  the  qualifications  neceffary  ad  cjfe,  and  be- 
tween (dtforderly  called,)  and  (not  called,  or  confentedto  by  the  Flock  at  allj 
and  between  (carelefs executing  the  Office)  and  not  having  the  Office  as  unca- 
capable.)  He  will  not  ftrain  at  fuch  gnats  as  thefe.  And  is  there  no  diffe- 
rence between  (lawful  Communicating)  and  committing  the  conduct  of  mens 
Souls  to  them  as  our  ftatedPaftors.     Mr.  Bali  lived  not  far  from  me  :  his  in- 
timate Friend  Mr.Jfn  well  knew  his  mind.  You  may  yet  know  it  fully  from 
Mr.  CW^of  Chefier,  a  filenced  Minifter  bred  up  in  his  houfe  andfometjme 
one  of  your  old  Patrons  (Sr.  Roger  Bur  gone)  Nonconforming  after  ma- 
ny others  at  Rockfcalin  Wanvickfinre.  Mr.  Zfatfwasnot  fuch  an  enemy  to  di- 
ftinguifhing  as  to  confound  Necefiaries  ad  tffe  Officii  &  ad  bene  effie. 

Seel.  19.  But  p.  124.  lam  alfo  brought  as  againft  my  felt  for  faying 
(That  a  Mini fiers  per fonal  faults  do  not  allow  people  to  feparate  from  the  Wor- 
kup of  God.  2.  nor  all  Minifterial  faults,  but  only  t ho fe  that  prove  him  and  his 
Mwifiration  utterly  intolerable.  Anf  1.  A  ftrong  proof,  that  therefore  the 
intolerable  may  be  received,  becaufe  1  fay,  no  :  I  contradict  my  felf  by 
faying  the  fame  things.  Perfonal  Faults  1  diftinguifhed  from  Minifterial 
and  tolerable  Minifterial  from  intolerable,  then  and  now  :  and  is  this  Con- 
tradiction? Do  not  ajl  do  fo  too,  till  now?  Yea  in  the  place  cited  by  him 

I,  u 


[8*3 


I  i.  faid,  that  as  to  perfonal  Faults,  as  Swearing,  Drmfynnefs,  &c.  they 
fliould  get  a  better  man,  if  lawfully  they  can.  2.  And  I  named  juft  as 
here  the  intolerable  inefficiencies,  direft  pag.  747.  viz.  1.  An  utter  infufli- 
ciency  in  knowledge  and  utterance  for  the  neceffary  parts  of  the  minifterialWork. 
2.  If  he  fet  him f elf  to  oppofe  the  ends  of  the  Miniftry,  &c  by  Herefie,  Ma* 
Ugnity.   And  I  name  the  faults  that  neceflltate  not  Separation. 

Sell*  20.  Next  he  citeth  my  words  againft  fome  mens  Factious  fepa- 
rating  humor :  And  doth  it  follow  that  becaufe  many  are  unfit  to  judge 
aright,  that  the  people  mult  take  all  obtruded  Paftors,  and  not  judge 
to  whom  to  truft  the  conduct  of  their  Souls?  How  unfit  are  the  ignorant 
to  judge  who  is  a  meet  Phyfician,  Lawyer,  Arbitrator,  yea  or  wife  or 
husband  for  them  :  And  yet  judge  they  mull  as  well  as  they  .can  :  Do  you 
not  expect  notwithstanding  their  unfitnefs,  that  they  judge  your  Books 
and  arguing  to  be  truer  than  mine?  And  is  it  by  your  bare  authority 
that  they  muft  fo  judge? 

Sell,  21.  But  he  much  blameth  me  for  laying  the  Cafe  far  of£ 
when  it  is  the  London  Separation  which  he  queftioneth  where  the  Minifters 
are  no  fuch  men.  Anfw.  Could  any  man  have  fo  far  fearcht  his  heart 
as  to  know  that  he  fpake  only  againft  Separation  in  this  one  City  ? 
When  there  is  no  fuch  Limitation  in  his  Book,  And  when  the  fame 
Laws,  the  fame  Silencings,  Fines,  Imprifonments,  accufations  of  the 
Preachers  are  all  over  the  Land.  But  I  am  glad  for  the  peace  of  the 
Nonconform ifts  elfewhere,  if  it  concern  not  them.  2.  As  to  London^ 
he  knoweth  that  I  give  the  Preachers  due  honour,  and  that  I  juftifie 
not  any  unnecelTary  Separation  of  the  people  from  them,'  nor  of  the 
Conformifts  from  the  Nonconformifts.  I  gave  him  an  account  of  my 
own  Practice  and  the  Reafons  of  it :  Let  other  men  give  account  of 
theirs,  I  know  very  many  of  my  mind.  3.  And  he  knoweth  that  loft 
told  him  that  many  things  make  good  mens  actions  culpable  in  fome 
degree ,  that  make  them  not  criminalls ,  odious ,  or  to  be  ruined. 
And  that  I  gave  him  many  of  their  Extenuations,  4.  Among  the 
reft,  verily  (to  ufe  his  own  Phrafe)  it  looks  fimewhat  odly  by  the  Church 
Law  or  Canon  iff  of  ado  to  excommunicate  many  fc ore  thoufands  in  the  Land, 
meerly  for  profeuing  to  take  fome  things  impofed  to  be  fin,  and  then  to 
revile  and  profecute  them  as  Schifmaticks,  for  not  communicating  with 
you.  5.  And  1  told  you  that  Laws'and  the  higher  ground  are  not  always 
the  Terminm  a  quo  of  S-chifm :  Some  of  them  were  never  of  your  Flocks, 
and  therefore  never  feparated  from  you,  but  as  you  do  from  them  ( and 
fomewhat  lefs.)  6.  And  the  Kings  Licenfe  firft,  and  proclaimed  Cle- 
mency often,  gave  them  fome  pofTeffiou  as  the  Law  giveth  you.    7. 

And 


[«*3 

And  Plague,  Fire  and  thoufonds  that  cannot  hear  you,  made  itnecefTary. 
But  fome  Ptrijl)  Churches  are  not  fall.  Anfw.  I  fee  none  of  thofe,  I  come 
in  divers  where  many  cannot  hear  the  Preacher  •,  and  would  yen  have 
moref  And  again  I  tell  you,  i.  They  keep  meetings  in  teller  Parilhes 
to  receive  thofe  that  come  out  of  greater.  2.  If  thofe  come  to  you, 
they  muft  keep  out  others.  3 .  When  it  is  commonly  known  that  in  their 
own  great  Parilhes  there  is  not  room,  it's  hard  for  Families  to  look  a- 
bout  the  City  for  room  in  uncertain  places.  4.  And  all  perfons  that 
culpably  diflike  you  are  not  therefore  to  be  forfaken. 

Sett.  22.  But  the  fame  man  that  citeth  my  Reprehenfions  of  Separa- 
tion asketh  me,  why  I  do  not  difown  it  ^  as  if  he  prefently  forgot  what  he 
had  written.  I  difown  Schifm,  and  therefore  the  greatefl  in  thefinful 
Church-tearers  that  fmite  the  Shepherds,and  then  cry  out  of  the  Flocks  for 
being  fcattered:  And  1  difown  the  leaft,butnot  by  Crueltybut  in  Charity. 

Setl.  23.  p.  127.  He  repeats  the  Incapacities  named  by  me,  (viz.  in 
Knowledge  and  Utterance,  by  Herefie,  &c.)  and  faith,  Of  all  thefe  the 
people  are  judges  ^  and  fo  may  feparate  :  Thtu  no  fit  led  Church  canfubfift^  &c* 
j4nfw.  1.  It's  a  hard  cafe  that  in  fuch  ?.  Volumn  as  this,  he  will  not 
tell  us  his  own  Judgment,  further  than  the  accufing  of  ours  intimateth 
it  ( which  if  we  tell  him  of,  he  can  fay,  [_lt  wot  net  his  fenfe."}  Will  he 
openly  fay  that  the  people  have  not  a  private  Judgment  of  difcretion 
in  order  to  their  own  practice,  whether  the  Preacher  be  an  Heretick, 
Papift,  Infidel,  Idolater,  or  not.?  but  mult  take  him  for  their  Paftor 
be  he  what  he  will  ?  I  know  he  will  not  fry  it.  What  then  would  he  be 
at  ?  Why  doth  he  accufe  us  for  that  which  he  dare  not  contradict  ?" 
Doth  he  any  where  tell  us,  in  wh.it  cafes  and  how  far  they  muft-  jud^e  ? 
No,  he  (buns  all  fuch  Queftionsas  tend  to  bring  the  caufe'into  the  light: 
put  twenty  and  he  will  aniwer  few  or  none  of  them.  If  he  did,  perhaps 
we  (hould  be  agreed  whether  he  will  or  not. 

Eut  ( Reader,  bear  thefe  tiring  Repetitions  as  I  muft  do'J  1.  He 
knoweth  that  it  is  the  Ordxmert  and  not  the  people  whom  I  make 
fudges  whofiallbe  aMinifter.  2.  That  it  is  the  King  and  Patrons  that  I  make 
the  only  Judges  who  [hall  be  tolerated,  and  maintrined  by  them,  and 
have  the  Tythes  and  /Temples.  •$.  And  that  though  the  Univerfal 
Church  was  many  hundred  years,  for  the  peoples  Election,  I  plead  ad  effe 
relationis  for  no  more  as  neceilary  but  content,  who  f  mil  be  the  Paftor^  to 
whom  they  will  trull  the  conduct  of  their  Souls :  And  this  is  but 
Judicium  difcretionis  &  privatum  non  publicum  regentis^  only  guiding  each, 
mans  own  ouedience  to  God.  4.  He  knoweth  (if  he  will  know)  that  I  fay 
and  fay  again,that  the  advantages  of  the  Laws  and  Rulers  Favour,and  the 

Tythes. 


C88D 

Tythes  and  Temples,  and  Parifh  Order,  and  national  Aflbciation,  arefo 
great  advantages  to  the  Service  of  God,  that  no  man  fhould  be  depri- 
ved of  them,  and  go  another  way,  but  upon  neceffity,  and  very  great 
and  urgent  caufe.  But  I  intend  God  willing  further  to  prove  to 
him  that  [when  9000  Miniftcrs  are  all  required  to  fin  or  ceaje  their- 
M'miftry,  a  neceffity  is  put  upon  them  to  exercife  it  again  ft  fuch  Prohibitions 
as  farr  as  they  can  without  doing  more  hurt  than  good *,  And  that  the  finful 
compliance  of  7OCO  will  not  excufe.the  other  2000  for  this  duty."]  And  this 
is  the  cafe  which  a  friend  of  truth  fhould  have  debated. 

Sect.   24,  p.   126.  But  ( faith  he ,)  How  ft) all  a  man  efcape  being  thought 
Heretical  by  the  people.     Anfw.  1.  See  his  own  anfwer  here,  Chap.   1.2. 
How  (hall  one  get  all  the  world  to  be  wife  and  good  t  If  lknew,  1  cannot 
procure  it.     But  put  the  cafe  within  your  fight }  How  will.you  efcape  be- 
ing judged  no  rightful  Pofiefibr  of  your  Deanry,  or  Prebend,  or  the 
King's  Chaplains  place,  or  the  Parilh  Church  of  St.  Andrews  ?  1  know 
not  how:  And  yet  if  an  Ufurper  accufe  you  here,  and  fay  e.  g.  that  the 
Church  of  St.  Andrews  is  his  and  not  yours,  muft  not  the  people  judge 
which  of  you  they  will  take  for  the  Ufurper,  and  which  they  will  joyn 
with  and  obey  ?  In  the  times  of  Ufurpation,  many  of  the  people  judg- 
ed the  Bilhops  to  be  none  of  their  Pallors,  nor  the  ejected  Minifters  *, 
muft  not  the  reft  therefore  judge  that  they  were  ?  Where  Ufurpers  de- 
ny the  King's  Right,  ought  not  the  people  to  judge  him  to  have  right , 
becaufe  they  may  err  ?  and  what  Prince  or  Prelate  may  not  the  people 
judge   Ufurpers  ?    What   Landlord   may   not   the    Tenants  deny  ? 
What  Matter  the  "Servants  f  What  Husband  the  Wife  ?  But  muft  they 
not  therefore  be  difcerning  Judges,  who  is  their  Landlord,  Mafter,Hus- 
bahd,  What  Schoolmafter  may  not  unlearned  men  mifcenfure  ?  What 
Phyfician  may  they  not  vilifie  ?  And  yet  they  (hall  judge  and  choofefor 
themfelves  ,  andfpeed  accordingly,  who  can  help  it .?  deny  men  a  judg- 
ment of  difcretion  to  guide  their  own  choice  and  actions,  and  you  con- 
tradict mankind,  and  deny  men  to  be  men.  What  in  the  world  is  more  a- 
bufed  than  Reafon  and  Freewill  f  and  yet  men  muft  act  by  Reafon  and 
Freewil.    Irs  unworthy  a  Divine  to  cry  out  againft  a  thing  for  fuch  una- 
voidable Inconveniences,  as  humane  darknefsand  badnefsdoneceifitate, 
and  to  i wallow  Camels  on  the  other  fide  and  take  no  notice  of  the  mif- 
chiefs  thereof,  nor  once  to  tell  us  how  to  efcape  both. 

Sett.  25.  He  inftanceth  in  mens  cenfure  of  me  for  the  Votlrine  of 
Juftification  and  asketh^  Are  men  bound  to  feparate  from  me  ?  Anfw.  One 
would  think  by  many  fuch  words  that  the  Doctor  did  ferioufly  believe 
that  I  had  fa  id,  that  all  men  are  bound  to  follow  an  erring  Judgment^  and 
to  feparate  when  they  falfly  judge  they  ought.  If 


[89] 

If  he  think  not  that  I  faid  To,  I  would  not  name  his  fault  left  I  more 
offend  him  :  If  he  think  I  faid  fo,  I  had  hoped  weaker  Readers  could  have 
better  underftood  me.  When  I  read  in  the  Books  of  fome  Con  form  ills  yet 
living  whom  1  much  honour,  that  to  obey  Confcience  though  it  err  is  to 
obey  God,  I  took  it  for  my  duty  oft  and  copioufiy  (efpecially  in  my 
Chrift  Direct.)  to  open  that  cafe,  and  to  prove  that  Confcience  h  no  Law- 
maker, but  only  adifcernerof  Gods  Law,  and  th.it  an  erring  Confcience 
involvetliamaninfinwhetherhefollowethitornof,  becaufe  God  chang- 
eth  not  his  Law  when  we  change  our  Judgments  of  it.  But  yet  there  are 
fome  cafes  in  which  it  is  a  farr  greater  fin  to  goagainfl:  Confcience  though 
it  err  than  with  it.  The  Dr.  dare  deny  none  of  this.  And  doth  ill  if 
he  would  perfwade  men  that  I  deny  it  :  and  that  God  makes  it  mens  du- 
ty to  do  ill  whenever  they  judge  it  good,  or  forfake  good,  when  they 
judge  it  evil. 

Seel.  26.  But  the  great  offence  is  p.  130  that  / infinuate  that  the  whole 
'Body  of  the  Church  U  guilty  of  great  Faults,  Conformity  being  a  fcandalopts 
thing  with  thirty  tremendous  Aggravations. — And  no  wonder  if  men  fo  judging 
prefer  others,  &c.  Anfm  -Again  and  again  I  fay,  1.  This  is  unrighteous 
dealing ;  To  impofe  all  thofe  things  on  us ;  To  caft  us  out  of  the  Mi- 
niftry  and  Churches  for  not  obeying:  To  Fine  and  imprifon  us,  and 
aecufe  us  as  Schifmaticks  and  Seditions,  To  write  and  preach  for  the  exe- 
cution of  the  Laws  againft  us,  to  ourRuine:  To  aggravate  our  Crime 
becaufe  we  tell  them  not  our  Reafons ;  To  call  us  to  tell  them  what  we  ftick 
at  *,  To  threaten  to  get  the  King  to  force  us  to  give  our  Reafons ,  To 
declare  in  Prefs  and  Pulpit  that  we  wilfully  keep  up  a  Schifm  and  have 
nothing  to  fay  for  it  \  To  continue  all  this  when  we  have  been  fiient  fe- 
venteen  years,  as  fearing  that  they  could  not  bear  it  *,  And  after  all  this 
when  we  difavowed  any  Accufation  of  them,  and  only  told  them  what 
we  feared  our  felves,  to  come  upon  us  with  this  charge  of  deep  accufing 
their  Conformity,  isinjuftice  if  there  beany  in  the  World.  Either  it  is  fin 
or  no  fin  which  we  fear.  If  none,  why  are  we  not  confuted  ?  or  invited 
yet  to  give  our  proofs  ?  If  fin,  who  mould  be  moft  offended  ?  To  be  yet 
plainer  with  you,  had  the  cafe  been  in  the  times  of  the  old  Prophets  and 
Priefts,  I  queftion  whether  to  let  fuch  a  Kingdom  alone  fo  long  in  that 
which  we  judge  to  be  fo  great  fins,  would  not  have  been  heavily  charged 
on  the  Preachers  :  And  I  profefs  that  my  confcience  is  more  in  doubt  whe- 
ther my  fo  long  forbearance  was  not  my  fin,  than  whether  faying  at  laffc 
what  I  did  was  fin  :  And  I  had  nothing  to  fatisfie  it,  but  the  men  that  I 
ought  to  judge  wifer  than  my  felf,  perfwaded  me  that  it  would  hive  done 
more  hurt  than  good,  and  caufed  but  our  further  rending,  And  I  think 

N  the 


[9o] 

the  Conformifls  mould  have  been  defirous  to  help  them  to  try  whether  it 
were  fin  or  not,  and  to  have  been  thankful  for  helping  to  lave  them  from 
it,  it  it  proved  fuch.  Bat  though  hence  I  extenuate  the  too  great  with- 
drawings  of  fome  men  againft  their  too  deep  accufations,  he  knoweth 
that  notwithstanding  all  thefe  aggravations,  I  neither  justified  nor  pravfti- 
fhd  proper  Separation. 

Sett.  27.  p.  133.  The  next  charge  isjhat  I  make  them  Ufurpers,i>z&,  1. 
AH  that  come  into  the  place  of  the  ejected  Mnifters,  at  leaft  to  the  people  that  con- 
tent not :  But  Law  and  Vfurpation  are  contrary.  Anfxv.  1 . 1  never  faid  that  all 
are  Ufurpers  to  all  the  people  that  content  not  :  If  the  body  of  the 
Church  confent  the  man  is  no  llfurper,  though  lome  odd  perfons  con- 
fen  t  not.  He  is  the  Churches  Paftor,  though  not  the  refufers.  2.  I  ne- 
ver laid  that  any  that  had  the  Law  for  them,  were  Ufurpers  of  the  Tithes 
and  Temples.  3.  I  never  faid  that  all  that  fucceed  ejected  Minifters  are 
Ufurpers  *,  many  of  them  have  the  Churches  after-confent,  though  not 
their  Eledion.  Yea  I  often  faid,  1.  That  it  is  the  peoples  duty  to 
confent  to  the  change  when  it  is  for  the  Churches  good.  2.  A  nd  that  their 
conftant  Communion  fignifieth  their  confent.  But  I  will  not  believe  yet 
that  the  Law  will  prove  a  man  no  Ufurper  of  the  Paftoral  Relation.  And 
when  I  have  fo  largely  proved  the  contrary  to  be  true,  and  to  be  the  judg- 
ment of  the  ancient  Churches,  it's  an  unfatisfadlory  courfe  to  me,  to  leave 
it  unanfwered,  and  fuppofe  himfelf  in  the  right.  Not  only  the  firft 
300  years,  but  even  under  Conftamim,  Valens,  Theodofim  Junior.  Zcnoy  Ba- 
filijcm,  Anafiatim,  Philippics,  Juftiman,  &c.  even  the  Patriarchal  Seats 
practifed  the  contrary,  keeping  their  chofen  Pallors  and  refufing  thofe 
impofed  by  the  Emperors  •,  and  other  Bimops  Seates  the  Emperors  fel- 
dom  meddled  with  as  to  the  choke.  Yea  in  Arcadims  days  Chryfiftomes 
Joannites,  in  his  imperial  City  were  of  another  mind.  Is  his  Rule  true  only 
in  England,  or  in  Frar.ce9SjAinJtaiyiM»fcovyi&c.  alfo,  or  where,  that  the 
Law  maketh  men  true  Palters? 

Seel.  28.  But/?.  132.  he  {aid  \jhat  he  dctcfteth  the  Principles  that  Jet 
mans  Laws  above  Gods,  and  that  in  ftating  the  Controverfie  he  fuppofed  an 
Agreement  in  all  the  Subftantials  oj  Religion  between  the  dijfenting  parties  of  our 
Church.  Anfw.  Of  all  things  you  are  the  unhappieft  in  flaring  the  Contro- 
verfie. The  Inftances  here  were  1 .  Infufhaency  through  Ignorance,  2. 
Herefie,  3.  Malignant  oppugning  the  very  ends  of  the  Miniftry,  4.  No 
true  calling.  1.  Doth  he  agree  with  us  in  all  the  Subftantials  of  Religion 
who  knoweth  not  the  very  effemialsof  Chridianity  i  Ignoramis  non  eft 
Confenjiis.  2.  Doth  he  agree  with  us  in  all  the  fubftantials  that  is  a  Here- 
tick  .?  or  if  we  falfly  judge  his  opinion  Herefie,  do  we  agree  with  him  ? 

3.  Is 


\ .  Is  malignant  oppofing  Godlinefs  and  pleading  for  prophanenefs  or  un- 
godlinefs  an  agreement  in  all  the  Subftantials  ?  4.  What  if  we  agree  in  all 
Subftantials  with  an  unordained  Layman  impofed  on  us  ?  is  he  there f 
our  true  Pallor  f  5.  But  how  (hall  we  know  whether  we  agree  or  not , 
if  we  are  no  judges  of  it  ?  Do  you  not  fee  your  own  Contradictions  ?  who 
fnall  judge  whether  the  Paftors  or  People  agree  ?  fhall  the  Prince  or  Patron  I 
If  you  know  the  Teachers  heart,  how  know  you  the  Peoples  ?  Mu^ 
believe  that  we  agree,  becaufe  you  fay  fo  ?  If  the  people  muft  judge  whe- 
ther they  Ajree,  they  muft  judge  of  the  things  in  which  the  Agreement  i?, 
that  is,  both  the  Paftors  Doctrine  and  their  own  minds.  And  is  not  this 
to  judge  whether  he  be  a  Heretick,  c\c.  or  not .?  And  who  fnall  judge  whe- 
ther the  difagreement  be  in  Suhftantials  f  It  mull  be  the  agreers.  And 
they  muft  be  wifer  than  I  if  they  can  learn  from  you  here,  what  is  a  Sub- 
ftantial,  and  how  to  know  it. 

Sett.  29.  It  may  be  he  will  fay,  that  where  Princes  and? arli anient s  are 
Orthodox,  no  tie  are  Vfurpers,  but  true  Paftors  whom  they  impofe.  Anf.  But 
doth  not  this  make  the  people  Judges  whether  Princes  and  Parliaments  are 
-Orthodox^nd  is  not  that  as  dangerous  as  to  judge  of  the  Teachers  ?  And 
Orthodox  Princes  and  Parliaments  may  impofe  Heretical  Teachers  :  and 
may  by  Law  enable  Patrons  and  Prelates  to  impofe  them.  What  more  na- 
tural than  to  propagate  what  men  Jike,and  oppofe  what  they  hate  ?  If  the 
many  hundred  Patrons  in  Englandbe  all  orthodox  and  pious,  andfreefrom 
Schifm,&c.  we  are  ftrangely  happy .-  If  not  we  may  expect  that  they  choofe 
accordingly,  Bnt  the  Biflwps  will fecureiu.  Anf.  1.  They  have  not  done. 
2.  They  fay  they  cannot  by  Law.  3.  Would  it  be  any  wonder  if  Bifhop 
Goodman  of  Glocefter  kept  not  out  any  Popifh  Teacher  ?  Or  if  fuch  Fathers 
of  the  Church  as  Archbilhop  Bromhall  let  in  fuch  as  would  have  the  Pope 
Govern  us  all  by  the  Canons  as  Patriark  and  principium  mitatis,  and  all  pafs  for 
Shcifmaticks  that  confent  not  to  fuch  a  forreign  Jurifdiction,  contrary 
to  our  National  Oaths. 

Sett.  30.  As  to  his  inftance  of  Solomons  putting  out  Abiathar,  &c.  I  an- 
fwered  it  fully  (and  many  more  objections)  in  my  firft  Plea,  and  will  not 
write  the  fame  again  for  him  that  thinks  it  not  worth  the  anfwering  or  ta- 
king notice  of.  " 

Seel.  31.  When  p.  1 38,  1 39.  he  makes  it  the  way  to  all  imaginable  Cox- 
fuftons,  to  deny,  1 .  that  the  Kings  Nomination  of  BiJJiops.  2.  and  the  Patrons 
of  Partfl)  Paftors  proveth  them  no  Ufurpers,  but  true  Paftors,  is  he  not 
an  unreverend  difhonourer  of  Biihops  himfelf,  who  maketh  them  all  that 
for  a  thoufand  years  held  the  fame  that  I  do,  to  be  the  authors  of  all  imd* 
ginabkConfufion  ?  Is  he  not  unreverend  to  their  Canons  ?  and  to  antiqui- 

N  2  ty? 


ty  ?  and  to  the  univerfal  Church  it  felf  *  Whatever  in  his  third  part  he  Ca- 
vils againft  it,  he  cannot  be  fo  ftrange  to  Church-hiftory  as  not  to  know 
that  they  were  commonly  againft  him. 

Sett.  32.  The  matter  of  the  next  accufation  is  p.  13?,  140.  having 
laid  Plea  p.  4 1 .  42.  \_If  any  make  finfnl  terms  of  Communion  by  Laws  or  Man- 
date,impofing  things  forbidden  by  God  on  thofe  that  will  have  Communion,and  expel" 
ling  thofe  that  will  not  fo  fin]  I  add  \Jf  any  fiwuld  not  only  excommunicate  juch 
perfons  for  not  complying  with  them  in  fin,  but  alfo  projecute  them  with  Malice^ 
Imprifonments,  Banijliment  or  other  Perfection  to  fore  them  to  tranfgrefs,  this 
wereheynow  aggravated  Schi fin."]  Anf.  And  is  not  this  true  ?  or  doth  his 
bare  repeating  it  difprove  it  ?  Is  he  a  zealous  Enemy  of  Schifm  that  taketh 
all  this  for  none  ?  I  did  not  Ileal  it  out  of  his  defence  of  ArchbifhopLW, 
but  lefs  than  this  is  there  made  Schifm.  Yet  he  tells  us  that  hefets  not 
mans  Laws  above  Gods,  nor  pleads  for  Perfecution.  But  left  the  repeating 
of  my  words  fhould  fhame  the  Accufer  he  hath  two  handfome  devices  1. 
He  puts  [complying  with  them  in  fin,  that  is.  Conformity f]  as  refufed,inftead 
of  \_thofe  that  will  not  fo  fin  }in  finful  terms  of  Communion  forbidden  by  God,  &C.] 
2.  He  forgeth  an  addition  as  mine  {and  therefore  it  is  no  fin  to  fiparate  from 
fucW]  when  I  have  no  fuch  words,  being  only  there  telling  what  is  Schifm, 
and  not  what  is  not.  I  confefs  it  will  found  odly  to  fay  \Jt  is  Schifm  not  to 
communicate  with  thofe  who  excommunicate,  imprifon  and  banifl)  me  by  Law,  if 
J  wiH  not  do  that  which  God  forbids,  and  they  makg  a  Condition  of  my  communion^] 
Fori  mull  not  fin  :  And  in  prifon  and  Banifhment  under  Excommunicati- 
on they  deny  me  communion.  And  yet  I  fay  not  that  it's  always  faultlefs, 
For  if  they  do  not  execute  their  own  Law,  in  fbme  cafes,  where  publick 
good  requi  ret  hit,  I  may  bell  communicate  with  them  as  far  as  they  per- 
mit me  withoutthe  impofed  fin,  till  they  do  execute  them.  But  this  ex- 
cufeth  not  their  Schifm. 

Sett,  33.  p.  140.  He  blames  me  as  charging  him  with  the filencing  defign. 
A  if  1  did  warn  him  in  real  defire  of  hisfafety  .*  If  defending  the  Church- 
Laws  and  Endeavours  for  ourreftraint,  in  the  words  to  which  I  refer  the 
Reader  :  If  preaching  and  writing  againft  our  preaching  as  Schifm,  and 
all  the  reft  in  his  Books  do  fignifie  no  owning  of  our  (ilencing,  I  am  glad 
that  he  meaneth  better  than  he  feemeth  :  who  could  have  thought  other- 
wife  that  had  read  1  .his  firft  Q.  whether  it  be  not  in  the  power  of  thofe  that 
give  orders  to  limit  and  fufpenH  theexercife  of  the  minifterial  Fun&ion. 
Q^  2.  And  whether  theChriftian  Magi  Urate  may  notjuftly  reftrain  fuch 
Minifters  from  preaching,  who  after  the  experience,  do  refufe  to  renounce 
thofe  Principles  which  they  judge  do  naturally  tend  to  involve  us  again  in 
the  like  trouble.     And  Serm.  p.  42.  the  Church  of  Englands  endeavours  after 

Vmformitj 


Uniformity  vs  acquitted  from  Tyranny  over  the  Conference  (of  men,  hy  the  Judg- 
ment y  &c]  And  p.  54.  condemning  them  as  hard  thoughts  of  the  Biflwps 
that  in  erne hy  they  follow  lthacius,  &c.  And  in  this  new  Book,  more  fuch 
might  have  deceived  a  man  that  judged  by  his  words.  And  his  arguing  that 
it  is  unlawful  to  preach  to  them  becaufe  it  is  unlawful  to  hear  \  What  was 
the  meaning  of  all  this  if  notfilencing  us? 

Sell.  34.  p.    140.  The  next  Crime  is  [Flea  p.  42.  As  Ion*  as  they  fup-> 
pofe  the  terms  of  our  Communion  to  be  finfuly  they  fay ,  The  Schifm  doth  not  lie 
on  thofe  that  ft  par  ate,  but  on  thofe  that  do  imp  ofe  fuch  terms  :  and  therefore  they 
may  lawfully  fepar ate from  fuch  impofersT^  Anf   It's  hard  to  know  what  words 
toufe  to  detect  all  thefe  hiftorical  untruths  without  being  thought  paffio- 
nate.     1 .  I  never  faid  that  (fuppofwg  tbemfinful)  will  juftifie  a  falle  fuppofer, 
but  have  oft  faid  the  clean  contrary  (their  fuppofing )  is  of  his  forging.  2.    I 
faid  not  'the  Schifm  doth  not  lie  on  thofe  th  u  fepar  ate)  but  only  that  it's  Schifm  in 
the  Impofers .)  This  alfo  is  his  Fiction.  3  -And  I  faid  not  (and  therefore  they  may  - 
lawfully  feparate  from  fuch  impofers.)  But  all  Readers  will  not  ftay  to  find  out 
his  Forgeries.But  how  much  of  this  he  (aid  once  himfelf,fee  in  my  Chap.  1 . 
Seft.  49.  But  here  he  comes  to  fomeclofing  diftinction,  which  mould 
have  gone  before  *,  [Between  terms  of  Communion  plainly  and  in  themfelves 
finful  \  and  fuch  as  are  only  fancied  to  befo  through  prejudice  or  wilful  ignorance  ,or 
error  of  confcience.~]  Anf  What  a  deal  of  labour  might  he  have  fpared  him- 
felf  and  us,  if  he  had  here  fixed  the  Controverfie  in  the  beginning  ^  we 
thankfully  accept  your  late  diftiuction :  we  ever  defied  here  to  put  it  to 
the  Ifiue  \  If  it  be  through  prejudice  wilful  Ignorance  or  Error  that  we 
judge  Conformity  a  fin,  not  only  Separation  but  Nonconformity  is  a  fin. 
If  we  do  not  prove  fome  parts  of  Conformity  (for  one  is  enough)  to  be 
plainly  fmful^  which  are  i npofed  as  Conditions  of  our  Minifterial  Commu- 
nion,andfomewhatimpofedonthe  people  as  conditions  of  all  that  part  of 
yourCommunion,which  lever  difTwaded  them  from, let  the  blame  be  ours; 
SetL-$$.  He  paifeth  next  to  them  that  deal  more  ingevHonJly  than  I  in  own- 
ing Separation,  And  thenreturnethjto  me  p.  151.  and  he  over  and  over 
repeateth  his  falfe  accufation,  \jhat  I  th'mkjt  lawful  to  communicate  with  them 
cccafionally,  but  not  ai  Churches  (as  thinkjng  they  want  an  ejfential  part,  viz.  a 
Tafiorwith  Epifcopal  Power)  but  as  Oratories, and  fo  that  I  renounce  Communion 
with  their  Churches  as  C\mrches.~]     Anfw.  If  thefe  untruths  had  been  made 
without  evidence  only,  and  not  alio  againfi  evidence ,  they  had  been  the  more 
excufeable  in  a  man  of  confideration  •  But  now  they  are  not  fo,  when  I 
havefo  often  declared  that  I  take  the  Parifh  Churches  that  have  true  Pa- 
ftors  for  true  governed  Churches,  and  prove  that  they  have  true  Bifhops 
(Epifcopos  Cregis)  whether  the  Diocefans  will  or  not,  becaufe  Gods  Will 

and 


c 


94  3 


and  not  the  Invefters,  inftituteth  their  Office,  and  meafureth  their  power, 
and  the  people  (hew  their  confent  by  conftant  Communion. 

Sett.   36.  Then  becaufe  £/  never  gathered  a  Churchy  nor  baptized  any  in 
2o years {nor gave  the  Sacrament  in_  1 8,~j  he  would  know  \jvhat  Church  I  have 
been  of  all  this  time,~\  and  he  fuppofeth  [of  no  Churchy     Jinf  I  thought  lie 
had  done  with  this  before  :  but  he  thinks  it  an  advantage  not  to  be  fo  ea- 
fily  let  go.   Would  he  know.   7.  What  my  Thoughts  were  ?  2.  Or  my 
Church-Covenant  ?   3.  Or  »zy-adtual  Communion?  He  ihall  know  all.    1.  I 
thought  divers  Minifters  where  1  lived  truePaftors,  and  the  Churches  true 
Churches :  I  cannot  fay  fo  of  every  Curate.  2.  I  made  no  Covenant  with 
any  of  them  .-  If  I  had  Mr.  Cheny  would  have  condemned  me  of  Atheifra, 
Infidelity,  and  what  not.     3.  With  divers  of  them  I  went  conftantly  to 
the  Liturgy,  Sermon  and  Sacrament,  as  with  true  Churches,  with  lome 
of  them  I  only  joyned  in  prayer  and  hearing,  1  heard  Dr.  Kieves  till  he 
caufed  me  to  be  fent  to  Jail,  and  then  1  could  not :  And  though  I  was  ac- 
cufed  by  many  for  hearing  a  fwearer,  I  told  them,  he  fwore  not  in  the 
Pulpit  .•  I  heard  his  poor  Curate  conftantly,  when  I  was  accufed  for  hear- 
ing a  Drunkard,  and  told  them  that  he  was  not  drunk  in  the  Pulpit.   But 
I  mult  teil  you,  1  communicated  alfo  with  fome  Nonconformifts.     And 
now  account  me  of  a  Church  or  no  Church  as  you  pleafe.    I  doubt  you 
are  renewing  the  Independant  Qneftions  with  me,  which  I  am  loth  to  difc 
pute.   1 .  Qu.  Whether  an  ordained  Minifter  mull  be  a  private  Member  of 
another  mans  Church  ?  Q_2.  Whether  when  a  Non-refident  Dean  leaveth 
his  Parifh  to  an  ignorant  drunken  Curate,  the  Parifh  Church  be  elTentiated 
by  its  relation  to  the  Refident  Curate ,   or  the  Non-refident  Dean  $ 
QK  3.  W7hether  a  Minifter  not  degraded  but  filenced,  living  in  fuch  a  Pa- 
rifh is  bound  to  take  that  Curate  for  one  that  hath  the  Paftoral  Charge  of 
his  Soul,  and  as  the  reft  of  the  flock  "to  commit  his  Soul  to  his  Paftoral 
Condudt  in  perfonal,  private  and  publick  Offices  ?  4.  But  I  would  ask  the 
Dean  himfelf,  whether  a  man  may  not  be  a  fixed  Member,  of  two  or  three 
Churches  at  once  ?  TheReafonsof  the ^£^,  are  i.Becaufefbythem)a 
man  may  be  the  fixed  Pa/for  of  two  or  three  Parifh  Churches  at  once  :  And 
an  Integral  Member  of  many  is  not  fo  hard  a  cafe,  as  to  be  a  conftitu- 
tive  Regent  Part  of  many.    2.  Becaufe  a  man  may  have  two  houfes  in  two 
Parilhes  at  once  •,  As  many  Londoners  have  half  their  Family  at  a  near 
Country  houfe,  and  half  at  a  City  houfe,  and  are  themfelves  part  of  the 
week  or  day  at  one,  and  part  at  the  other.     And  they  make  Covenants 
with  neither,  but  what  a&nal  Communion  intimateth.     Q.    5.    And  if 
fo  why  might  not  I  at  once  be  judged  a  Member  of  two  Churches  at  once, 
to  far  as  I  communicate  oft  with  both  ?  I  therefore  anfwer  hisqueftion 

further, 


[95] 


further,  what  Church  I  was  a  Member  of f  i.  I  was  a  Member  of  Chrifts 
Universal  Church  ?  Is  that  none  ?  and  yet  is  in  the  Creed  ?  2.  I  was  a 
Member  of  the  reformed  Church  if  you  will  call  that  One  becaufe  aflbcia-  ■ 
ted  in  one  Reformed  Religion,  3.  I  was  a  Member  of  the  Church  of 
England,  both  as  a  Chriftian  Kingdom,  and  as  the  Churches  in  England 
agreeing  in  the  Chriftian  Reformed  Religion.  4;  I  was  a  Member  of  the 
Provincial  Church  of  Canterbury,  fo  far  as  living  peaceably  in  it,  and  fub~ 
mittingboth  tofuch  power  as  they  had  from  the  King  as  Magiftrates  and 
a  meer  general  helping  inftrucling  care  of  many  Churches  could  make  mc. 
5.  So  far  alfo  I  was  a  Member  of  the  Diocefan  Churches  where  I  lived.  6. 
And  I  was  a  Member  of  fome  Parochial  Churches'  fo  far  as  conftant  Com- 
munion could  make  or  prove  me  :  And  of  others  (two  at  once)  fofar  as 
partial  and  moveable  Communion  could  prove  me.  If  this  will  not  fa- 
tisfieyou,  I  have  proved  before  (and  oft  tofomelndependants)  that  ma- 
ny men  are  under  no  obligation  to  be  fixed  Members  of  any  Pariih  Church : 
f  whether  the  King  be  of  any  I  know  notj 

Sett.  3  7.  But  p.  152.  he  comes  upon  me,  why  I  thought  it  not  my  duty  dl 
this  while  to  Baptizje,  Administer  the  Sacrament,  was  Inotfolemnly  bound  by  Or- 
dination to  one  as  well  as  the  other  ?  Presbyters  of  old  were  rarely  allowed  to 
preach.~\  Anf.  1 .  You  tell  the  World  what  meafure  we  muft  expect  from 
fuch  as  you.  If  we  had  all  forborn  any  Church  gatherings,  and  Paftoral 
undertaking  of  Flocks,  and  both  Sacra  nents,  c\c.  and  only  preached  as 
loth  to  offend  you  more  than  needs,  our  accufations  had  but  been  the  grea- 
ter ?  which  incourageth  your  more  ingenious  Diffenters  to  do  what  they  al- 
io are  accufed  of  2.  Do  you  not  know  our  Reafons  ?  They  are  thefe  : 
j.  Becaufe  we  fuppofe  there  is  a  greater  want  of  our  preaching,  than  of 
ouradminiftring  Sacraments  :  And  we  would  obey  the  Laws  in  all  things 
lawful  \  and  go  from  you  and  offend  you  no  further  thanneceif  ty  will  jufti- 
fie  us.  2.  Becaufe  a  Minifters  Relation  to  the  Church-llniverfal  and  to 
the  world  ceafeth  not,  when  his  relation  to  a  Parilh  Church  may  ceafe.- 
And  we  have  not  the  fame  obligations  to  give  the  SacrameEt  to  all  the 
Chriftians  or  World  where  we  preach,  as  we  have  in  a  Pariih  Charge. 
Paul  thanfcth  God  that  he  baptized  nor  many  Corinthians,  becaufe  he 
not  fent  to  baptize  but  to  preach  the  Gofpel ;  nor  is  the  terrible 
charge  2  Tim.  4.  1 2.  equal  as  to  both.  3.  Our  Ordination  bound  us  to 
preach  and  ad minifter  Sacraments,  when  we  are  thereto  lawfully  called  : 
And  we  were  fo  called  to  one,  when  we  were  not  to  the  other .-  nor  were 
all  of  us  fo  called  alike.  But  when  we  know  that  this  way  doth  as  much  of- 
fend you,  we  may  go  further  in  due  time.  Aud  do  you  in  one  part  of 
your  Book  blame  us'for  going  further  than  the  old  Nonconformilts  fas 

you 


you  thought)  and  in  the  fecond  thus  accufe  us  for  not  going  further.' 
Sett.  38.  He  is  again  at  his  talk  of  only  occafional  Communion?  Andhad 
his  miftake  no  Occafion  ?  yes ;  he  that  readeth  my  Books  may  fee  what; : 
that  is,  1 .  When  I  have  faid  that  fome  Parifhes  having  not  capable  or  cal- 
led Paftorsl  take  to  be  no  true  Political  Churches ;  but  yet  can  communi- 
cate with  fuch  as  Oratories  or  Chappels.     2.  That  fome  true  Churches  I 
communicate  with  in  tranfitn  or  occafionally  as  ftrangers,  whofe  Difci- 
pline  and  Minifters  Calling  I  am  not  bound  to  take  account  of.     3.  I  tell 
thofe  that  withdraw  too  tar  and  take  fome  true  Churches  for  none,  that 
were  it  fo  they  might  occafionally  join  with  them  as  Oratories,     4.  And 
thofe  that  dare  not  commit  their  Souls  to  the  Paftoral  Conduct  of  fome 
weak  and  bad  men,  that  yet  they  may  occafionally  communicate  with  them 
upon  great  and  urgent  Reafons.    And  here  he  gathereth  his  oft  repeated 
untrue  Reports.  ' 

Sett.  39p.  1 5  6. He  grants  there  is  no  Separation  where  there  is  no  Obligati- 
on.   And  he  will  prove  us  obliged  to  confi ant  Communion  with  them.   1.  Bc- 
caufe  we  mnfi  ufe  all  lawful  meant  for  Peace  and  Unity.     Anf.    1 .  We  are  rea- 
dy to  prove  that  our  Conformity \  nor  our  forbearing  to  preach  the  Gofpel  are 
no  lawful  means.     2.  Can  you  as  well  prove,  1.  That  it  is  not  lawful 
for  you  to  joyn  with  us  ?  2.  And  to  forbear  filencing,  excommunicating, 
fining  and  imprifoning  us  ?  Was  it  no  lawful  means  for  Peace  and  Vnity  to 
haveforborn  impofing  all  the  Covenants,Profeffions?Subfcriptions,  Oaths 
and  Pra&ifes,  of  what  you  call  indifferent  and  we  think  finful.'  3.  And  is 
it  not  lawful  for  Parents  to  enter  their  own  Children  at  Baptifm  in  Cove* 
nant  with  God  ?  4.  Is  it  unlawful  to  Chriften  fuch  as  fcruple  your  ufe  of 
theCrofs?  5.  Or  to  receive  thofe  to  Communion  that  fcruple  your  Ge- 
fture?  6.  Or  to  forbear  Canonical  Excommunicating  all  profefled  Non- 
conformities in  the  Land  ?  7.  Or  to  let  Lords  and  Gentlemen  choofe  any 
Nonconformiits  to  be  Tutors  to  their  Children,  whiift  the  Papifts  may 
fend  theits  to  Doway,  St.  Omers,  &c.  He  faith,  he  is  \jerfwaded  it  is  one  of 
the  provoking  fins  of  the  Nonconformifts,  that  they  have  beenfo  backward  to  do, 
what  they  were  convinced  they  might  with  a  good  confeience.     Anfi  Woe  to  US, 
if  we  be  not  willing  to  know  our  fins.     But  1.  If  you  will  tell  me  of  any 
one  lawful  thing  th3t  1  have  omitted,  that  tended  to  Peace,  I  will  thank 
you.     2.    An  indifferent  thing  is  no  means  of  Peace  when  it  will  do  more 
hurt  than  good.    To  ceafe  the  Miniftry  we  durft  not :  To  ufe  fome  in- 
different forms  in  your  Churches  we  could  not,  being  caft  and  kept  out. 
And  to  ufe  the  faoie  to  thofe  that  are  againft  them  ;  when  it  will  hurt 
them,  and  procure  no  peace  with  you,  and  thofe  have  fped  worft  from 
you  that  haye  come  neareft  you,  aud  nothing  will  fervc  but  all  j  what  ten- 
dency 


U7l 

dency  hath  this  to  Unity  ?  You  know  my  own  cafe  proveth  all  this.  I 
regarded  not  the  cenfures  of  any  that  go  too  far,  fo  as  to  keep  me  from 
doing  what  I  judged  lawful :  And  did  it  tend  to  peace  ?  No,  one  fends 
meto  Jail  when  I  went  twice  a  day  to  his  Church:  Othersfay,  He  is  like  an 
j4pe,  that  is  fo  much  the  more  ugly  becaufe  he  is  like  a  man  :  Another  more  fo- 
ber  faith,  \J  how  not  what  to  make  of  Mr.  B.  He  communicateth  with  us,  and 
he  preachethto  the  Nbnconformifts  :  Like  a  man  that  will  go  one.  ft ep  on  one 
fide  the  hedgey  and  another  ftep  on  the  other. ~]  And  this  man  is  much  in  the 
right :  for  I  fay  ftill,  [_It  is  thejeparatmg  hedges  in  Chrift's  Vineyard  that  Ihatey 
and  the  enclofwg  hedge  that  1  am  for  :  I  have  Bufinefs,  Friends,  Relationsand 
great  Duties  on  both  fides  the  hedge,  fome  with  you  and  fome  with  others , 
And  if  your  hedges  would  feparate  Parents  from  Children,  Husband  and 
Wife,  Chriftian  Neighbours,  &c  caufelefly  I  will  not  be  fo  feparated, 
but  do  my  bell  to  pull  down  that  hedge.  And  again  confider  whofe  fin 
it  is,  that  fo  many  lawful  things  are  denyed  us  for  Vnity.  Hold  bun  to  your 
Rule  here  and  we  are  agreed.    And  he  ieemeth  to  confent.  For, 

Seft.  40.  p.  1 76.  Of  the  Rule  Phil.  3. 16.  he  faith,  \JflwiU  but  al- 
low that  by  virtue  of  that  Rule  men  are  bomd  to  do  all  things  lawful  for  the  pre- 
ferving  the  peace  of  the  Churchy  we  have  no  further  difference  about  this  matter. 
Anf.  It's  well  he  will  fay  fo  much  of  the  Rule,  we  gladly  confent.  Then  all 
the  queftion  is,  what's  lawful  on  both  fides  f  I  add  one  Qjnore.  Is  it  not 
lawful  for  peace  to  forbear  forcing  men  to  difoblige  1 000  ?  whom  they  ne- 
ver knew,  from  being  obliged  by  an  Oath  and  Vow  to  that  part  of  the 
matter  which  is  good  ?  If  it  be  the  conjunction  of  fome  things  bad,  that 
difobligeth  them,  then  he  that  inferteth  a  bad  thing  is  free  from  all  obli- 
gations of  his  vow,  even  in  materia  licita  &  necefiaria.  And  if  the  want 
of  impofing  Power  be  made  the  caufe,  whether  is  the  Coronation  Oathim- 
pofed  by  a  fuperior  Power  on  the  King,  or  is  it  his  own  contract  ?  or  is 
he  therefore  not  obliged  by  it  ?  Had  it  not  been  requifite  that  you  fhould 
have  juftified  all  that  we  ftick  at  as  unlawful,  before  you  charge  us  with 
croffing this  Rule? 

Sell.  56.  p.zo^&c.  My  words  in  many  Books  againfl  Schifm  are  ci- 
ted and  praifed  \  Reader,  he  tells  men  the  meafure  of  their  Charity  and 
Church  Communion,  viz*  That  men  that  do  as  much  as  I  do,  that  forbore 
fo  long  Sacramental  Ad  miniftration,  that  gathered  no  Church,  that  held 
conftant  Communion  with  divers  Pariih  Churches,  that  have  wrote  Co  much 
and  earneftly  againfl:  Schifm,  (hall  yet  be  ejected,  fdenced,  pay  40 1.  a 
Sermon  and  lie  in  Jails  unlefs  I  will  do  more.  While  Biftiop  Lauds  de- 
lign  for  widening  the  Church  doors  to  the  Papifts,  is  magnified  by  Heyliu 
and  others  as  a  good  work. 

O  &3. 


Cm] 

Seft.  13.  Firft  he  finds  but  w*  juftifiable  Caufes  of  Separation  -7  but/?.' 
213,214.  he  hath  found  three  and  no  more,  1 .  Idolatrom  Worfhip  ;  2.  Falfe 
Dotlrine  impofed  inftead  of  true*      3.  Making  and  impofing  things  indifferent  a* 
necejfaryto  Salvation.    Anf  1.  Readers,,  do  you  remember  how  even  now 
he  expofed  to  odium,  the  peoples  judging  whether  the  Pallors  be  Here- 
ticks  ?  And  now  they  may  feparate  for  falfe  Dottrinc.    2.  Iintreathim 
to  think  again  of  thefe  Cafes  following.     1 .  What  if  the  Worfhip  be 
not  Idolatrous,  but  Blafphemous,  or  utterly  Ridiculous,  tending  to  con- 
tempt of  God  ?  2.  What  if  it  be  in  an  unknown  Tongue  >   3.  What  if 
the  Church  have  no  true  Minifter  ?  I  am  glad  you  are  not  for  feparating  for 
want  of  Epifcopacy  or  Epifcopal  Ordination  ?  4.  What  if  the  Church 
want  half  the  Church- Worfhip  ?  as  to  have  Preaching  and  Prayer  without 
Sacraments  ?  or  Sacraments  without  Preaching  or  Prayer,  or  Preaching 
without  Prayer,  &c.   5.  What  if  the  Church  be  but  fchifmatical  ?  Have 
you  written  all  this  Book,  to  draw  men  ta  you  from  the  Independant 
Churches,  and  do  you  now  tell  us  that  the  people  may  not  feparate  from 
them,  on  the  account  of  Schifm?  6.  Whatif  a  Church  require  me  to  tell 
orfubfcribetooneknownLie,  or  to  fay,  that  I  believe  vvnat  I  do  not.-  or 
to  juftifie  thoufands  that  I  think  obliged  by  a  Vow,  if  they  break  it  t 
What  if  they  impofe  any  one  fin  on  me  without  which  they  will  not  receive 
me  to  Communion  .?  7.  What  if  I  remove  for  my  Edification  from  a  drun- 
ken ignorant  Prieft,  to  the  Church  of  a  wife  and  holy  Pallor  f  8.  Are  we 
loofer  than  Pope  Nicholas  that  forbad  men  to  hear  Mafs  from  a  Fornicating 
Prieft  ?  9.  I  would  you  had  fpoken  to  Edification  and  told  men  whatp//^ 
Dotlrine  it  is  that  will  allow  Separation^  and  whether  it's  falfe  Doctrine  preach- 
td,  or  only  impofedton  the  perfon  to  be  owned  t  If  the  former,   is  it  all 
falfe  Dotlrine  or  but  fine,  and  what  f  Verily,  if  alJ,  you  are  tenfold  more 
a  Seperatift  than  1 ;  For  I  look  to  hear  fometimes  fome  words  of  falfe  Do- 
ctrine in  moll  Pulpits,  even  of  Gonformifts  ?   If  it  muft  be  herefie  it  felf, 
I  will  not  feparate  for  once  hearing  it,  if  the  Church  profefs  it  not.    If  it 
be  impofed  Error  that  you  mean,  take  heed  left  you  juftifie  Separation 
from  your  Church,  by  the  new  Article  of  Infants  certain  Salvation.  And 
whenboth  Arminians  and  Anti- Arminians  fubfcribe  the  3^  Articles,  tell  us 
whether  thofe  Articles  are  true  in  both  their  fenfes,or  whether  the  fence  be 
not  the  thing  fubfcribed  ?   or  whether  one  half  of  them  fhould  feparate* 
You  are  too  unmerciful  to  your  felf;  but  what  kind  of  Churches  fhould 
there  be  upon  your  terms  ?  1  find  no  more  in  his  fecond  part  which  I  am 
much. concerned  in. 

Chap* 


C99] 

C  H  A  P.    VIL 

77?e  fyply  to  his  Third  Tart :  77^  beginning! 

Sett.  i.  TN  his  third  Part  Ifirftfindmy  felf  accufedp.242,^.  Andthat 
1  is  not  only  by  infilling  on  a  falfe  accufation  of  my  words, 
but  adding  a  confutation  of  himfeif,  as  if  he  difcerned  not  that  he  did  it. 
In  Treat,  of  Concord  I  fay,  [_If  it  holdeththat  God  inftituted  only  Congregati- 
onal or  Parochial  Churches  ,as  for  prefent  Communion  ,t  hen  none  of  the  reft  inftitu- 
■ted  by  man  may  deprive  them  of  their  priviledges  granted  by  Chrift.  ~]  I  put  it  but 
with  an  (If  it  befe)  becaufe  I  told  them  my  own  doubt  of  it.  After  1  fay, 
[To  devife  newfpeciesof  Cnurches  without  Gods  Authority, and  impofe  them  on  the 
World  j  yea  in  his  name^  and  call  all  Viffenters  Schifmaticht  is  worfe  Vfurpation 
than  to  make  and  impofenew  Ceremonies  and  Liturgies.']  And  can  any  Chri- 
ftian  deny  either  of  thefe  ?  But  he  faith,  [This  fuppofeth  Congregational 
Churches  to  be  fo  much  the  inftitution  of  Chrift ',  that  any  conftitution  above 
thefe  is  unlawful  and  unfupport able  .•]  which  is  more  than  the  lndependant 
Brethren  daajfert.  And  is  any  word  of  all  this  true  ?  1.  The  Indepen- 
dants  much  infill  on  this  ?  1  refer  him  now  but  to  Amefn  Medul.  deEccl. 
Mnift.  2.  Do  the  words  fuppofe  that  which  is  plainly  excepted  in  them  ? 
If  it  were  granted.  1.  That  the  Congregational  only  are  fo  inftituted. 
2.  And  that  others  are  not  fet  over  them  by  God,  3.  And  yet  are  obtru- 
ded in  his  name,  without  his  authority.  4.  And  all  DhTenters  called  Sch if- 
raaticks,]  then  I  fay  they  are  unlawful.  5.  To  coufute  himfeif  plainly 
he  confelTeth  that  I  fay,  The  queftion  is  not  whether  the  Archbifhops  ft.ould 
be  over  the  particular  Churches,  as  Succejfors  to  the  Apoftolic aland  General  0- 
verfeers  of  the  fir  ft  Age  in  the  ordinary  continued  parts  of  their  Office.  Nor 
whether  Patl'mks,Diocefansy  Lay-Chancellors  as  Officers  of  the  King,exercifin£ 
Magiftracy  be  lawful.  ]  And  yet  he  faith  that  I  fuppofe  the  contrary. 
He  next  pretends  to  give  my  Reafons  :  And  the  chief  is,  becaufe  it  over- 
tbroweth  the  fpecies  of  Gods  making  *,  when  I  only  fay,  That  which  over- 
throweth  it  is  unlawful  •,  which  is  not  the  Archbifhops  that  are  over  the  lower 
Biihops,  but  thofe  that  put  them  all  down,  and  governed  the  Carkafles 
of  the  mortified  particular  Churches  as  the  loweft  Bifhops  of  many  fcore 
or  hundred  fuch  as  themfelves.  And  he  faith  I  am  for  the  full  exercife  of 
Difcivline  within  the  particular  Church  •,  while  he  confeft  I  fpake  not  a- 
gainA  Archbifhops.  And  yet  he  faith,7lW$  is  a  fair  reprefentation  of  my  opinion. 

O  z  Sett. 


SeB.  2.  Coming  to  prove  our  Epifcopacy  the  fame  with  the  Primi- 
tive he  pretendeth  to  confute  me:  That  which  I  aflerted  was,  i.  That 
by  the  firft  Inftitution,  and  Constitution,  every  Church  no  bigger  for 
number  of  Souls  than  one  of  our  great  Parities  had  a  Bifhop  of  their  own, 
(one  or  more  I  difputed  not.)  2.  Yea  that  for  the  firft  two  hundred 
years  if  not  more,  no  one  Bifhop  had  a  Church  fo  big  as  fome  of  ourPa- 
rifhes,  at  leaft  except  Alexandria,  and  Rome,  and  even  of  them  it  is  not 
certain  that  they  had  more  Souls.  3-  That  after  by  degrees  the  cafe  was 
altered  :  But  yet  after  there  were  many  Meetings  like  Chappels,  a  while 
there  was  but  one  Altar.  4.  After  that  thofe  Ghappels  had  Altars ;  but 
fo  as  that  at  certain  times  of  the  year,  the  people  of  the  Cities  and  next 
parts  were  all  to  communicate  with  the  Bifhop,  and  were  no  more  than 
could  meet  to  choofe  the  Bifhops,  and  to  be  prefent  as  to  the  main  body 
of  them,  and  difciplinary  debates,  to  give  confent.  5.  In  Cyprian's  time 
at  Carthage  fa  place  of  greatnefs  and  great  numbers  of  Chriftians)  the 
Church  was  grown  very  great,  but  not  beyond  the  exercife  of  fuch  perfonal 
Communion  as  I  defcribed  :  And  the  Bifhops  there  and  round  about  be- 
ing worthy  men,  kept  up  the  life  of  the  former  Difcipline.  And  as  great 
as  their  Church  was,  we  would  be  glad  of  fuch  an  Epifcopacy,  Order 
and  Commnnion.  For  I  oft  told  you,  that  by  present  Communion,  I  meant 
not  that  all  muft  meet  in  one  place  at  once,  (For  the  tenth  part  of  fbme 
Parifhes  cannot : )  But  that  as  Neighbours  and  Citizens,  may  have  per- 
fonal Converfe  and  Meetings  per  vices,  of  fome  at  one  time  and  fome  at 
another,  as  different  from  meer  mental  Communion,  or  by  Synods  or 
Perfons  delegate,  or  as  their  Governours  or  Reprefentatives,  and  this  for 
mutual  Edification  in  holy  Doctrine,  Worfhip  and  Conversation.  And 
that  the  footfteps  of  this  remained  long,  when  worldly  Reafons  had 
made  a  change. 

And  all  this  I  have  proved  fo  fully  in  my  Treatife  of  Epifcopacy  be- 
fides  what's  faid  in  my  Abftracl:  of  the  Epifcopal  Hiftory,  that  till  fome 
man  fhail  confute  the  full  Evidence  of  Antiquity  there  brought,  I  have 
no  more  in  Reafon  to  do  upon  that  fubject.  And  though  the  Doctors 
Hiftory  of  this  be  the  molt  confiderable  part  of  all  his  Book,  yet  fo  far 
doth  he  leave  what  I  fay  uncontradicted,  that  I  find  not  one  word  that  he 
faith  againft  any  of  my  Teftimonies,  nor  any  for  his  own  caufe,  for  the 
firft  two  hundred  years:  But  when  hefhould  have  proved  the  extent  of 
the  Churches  at  two  hundred  years,  he  begins  his  hiftorical  Proofs  at 
two  hundred  and  fifty  for  three  or  four  great  Cities  in  the  World,  and 
fo  proceeds  to  Aiignftine  at  above  four  hundred,  and  Fiftor  Vtkenfis  a- 
bout  four  hundred  and  ninety,  Theodoret  four  hundred  and  thirty,  (where 

he 


D*S3 

he  fuppofeth  me  to  fay  that  of  his  City?  which  I  faid  of  the  Diocefs 
of  that  City:  J  And  to  confute  all  Impertinencies,  and  groundlefs  Sup- 
pofitions,  while  my  full  proofs  are  unanfwered,  is  but  lofs  of  time. 

Sett.  3.  His  chief  argument  is,  {that  no  City  how  great  foever  was  to  have 

more  Bifhops  than  one. ~]     Anf.  1.  He  can  prove  no  fuch  Rule  in  the  firfl:  two 

hundred  years.     2.  See  how  well  the  defenders  of  Prelacy  agree  ?  Grotiiss 

(&  de  Impeno  &  in  Anotat. )  and  Dr. Hammond  I  cited.who  fay  that  Cities  at 

firft  had  two  Biihops  in  each  (Rome,  Antioch,  &c. )  one  of  Jewifh 

Chriftians,  and  one  of  Gentile  Chriftians,  and  faith  D.  hi.  Peter  at  Rome 

was  Biihop  of  the  Jews,  and  Pauloi  the  Gentiles,  and  they  had  two  Suc- 

ceflbrs ;  and  faith  Grottus  The  Churches  were  formed  to  the  manner  of 

the  Synagogues ,  and  there  were  divers  Churches  with  divers  Bifhops  in 

the  fame  City  (in  1  Tim.  5.  \^.& delmp.p.  ^^^  356,357.)     3.  In  the 

fourth  Century  a  Council  at  Capua  decreed  that  the  two  Biihops  with  their 

feveral  Churches  at  Antioch( Flavians  and  E^^n/^)fhould  live  together  in 

Love  and  Peace.  4.  This  was  a  good  cuftom  while  there  were  in  the  Cities 

no  more  than  one  Biftiop  might  take  care  of :  And  the  cuftom  held  when 

times  altered  the  cafe  and  reafon  of  it :  And  PoflefTion  and  the  Defire  to 

avoid  divifion  made  it  held  up  by  good  men.     5.  I  have  at  large  in  my 

Treatife  of  Epifcopacy  confuted  the  opinion  of  appropriating  Biihops 

to  Cities  •,  and  fo  did  the  old  Churches  that  fet  up  Chorepifcopos. 

Sett,  4.  p.  259.  He  faith,  {In  Cities  and  Diocefes  under  one  Bifliop  were 
feveral  diftintt  Congregations  and  Altar s.~\  Anf.  1.  Yes,  no  doubt,  after 
the  fecond  Century,  and  perhaps  in  two  Cities  a  little  before  •,  but  in  few 
in  the  World  till  towards  the  fourth  Century.  2.  This  is  the  fame  man 
who  in  the  very  Sermon  which  he  defendeth  faid  [p.  27.  Though  when  the 
Churches  increafedthe  occafional  Meetings  were  frequent  in  feveral  places,  yet 
ftill there  was  but  one  Church,  and  one  Altar,  and  one  Baptifm,  andone  Biflwp, 
with  many  Presbyters  ajfifiing  him  :  And  this  is  fo  very  plain  in  Antiquity,  as 
to  the  Churches  planted  by  the  Apoftles  them f elves  in  feveral  parts,  that  none  but 
a  fir  anger  to  the  hifiory  of  the  Church  can  ever  call  it  in  que  ft  ion. ~\  But  when  I 
told  him  how  this  would  agree  us,  and  hurt  his  canie,  he  will  quickly  fall 
under  his  own  cenfare,  and  became  \_a  ft  ranger  to  the  hifiory  of  the  Church'] 
alTerting  many  Altars  in  one  Church  of  one  Biihop.  This  Sermon  was 
written  fince  his  Irenicon.  And  now  he  feigneth  a  di (Unci ion  between 
{An  Altar  taken  with  particular  refpettto  a  Biflwp  :  and  for  the  place  at  which 
Chriftians  didcommunicate.~]  But  what  was  the  Altar  that  was  taken  with 
particular  refpeft  to  the  Bifhop  ?  Was  it  notthe  material  placeof  Com- 
municn?  And  fo  the  members  of  the  diftin&ion  are  co-incident.  Saith 
Optatus  lib.  6.  Quid  eft  Altar e  vifi  fedes  &  corporis  &  fanguims  Chrifti  ?  Each 
^  Church 


C  to*  ] 

Church  had  long  but  one  of  thefe.  The  belt  Altars  that  Were  made  after 
the  chief  Church  Altars  were  not  for  ordinary  communion,  but  homH 
rary  of  fome  Martyrs.  The  truth  is ,  the  phrafe  of  mum  Akarc 
was  taken  up  when  each  Church  had  but  one  *,  but  to  fet  up  Altarc 
tontra  Aha;  e  continued  after  to  fignifie  Anti-Churches.  But  I  have  fully 
anfwered  this  in  my  Treatife  of  Epijcopacy.  His  conje&ures  from  the 
numbers  of  Officers,  &c.  he  may  fee  there  alfo  fufficiently  confuted  and 
in  Ch.  Hift.  And  the  odd  inftance  of  iheodoret  he  doth  not  at  all  make  cre- 
dible by  his  willing  belief  of  Metim  and  other  PopiQi  Feigners.  And 
were  that  Epiftle  genuine  a  Cypher  is  eafilydropt  in  by  Corrupters  :  It 
h  ath  need  of  better  authority  that  mail  be  fo  lingular  from  the  cafe  of  all 
other  Churches.  And  I  fuppofe  he  knoweth  that  Cyrus  was  not  afimple 
Bifhoprick,  but  a  Metropolitane  Seat,  and  might  have  800  Parilh  Bifhops. 

Yea  whereas  there  were  under  Antioch  feven  Dioceles,  and  fifteen  Pro- 
vinces or  as  others  fay  thirteen,  that  yet  had  many  Bifhops  under  them, 
as  Seleucia  twenty  four.  &c.  that  were  more  dependant  on  Antioch,  Cy- 
rus was  one  of  the  eight  Provinces  or  Metropolis  that  were  per  fe  fubfifientes : 
And  therefore  when  Theodoret  faid  how  many  Churches  were  under  hands, 
it's  like  he  meant  Biihops  Churches  and  not  meer  Presbyters,  and  either  a 
Cypher  dropt  in  corrupted  the  account  (or  elfe  the  Bifhops  had  but  fingle 
Congregations  •,  But  for  my  part  as  the  cafe  fo  late  concerneth  me  not,  £q 
I  fee  nothing  to  perfwade  me  that  that  Epiftle  is  genuine  and  uncorrupt.But 
I  would  not  have  a  Diocefs  which  then  had  many  Provinces,  or  a  Province 
which  had  many  Bifhops  Churches,  be  taken  for  a  fingle  Church. 

Sell.  5.  The  fame  I  fay  of  Carthage,  which  was  the  Metropolis  of  A- 
frica,  and  the  firft  of  fix  Provinces  before  Jufiinian^nd  of  feven  after,  and 
Proconfular,  and  the  Church  called  Africa  Caput  as  Auguft.  ep.  162.  The 
fixth  and  feventh  Carthage  Councils  tell  us  of  the  diftribution  of  the  Pro- 
vinces, decreeing  three  Judges  to  be  fent  out  of  each  Province,  viz.  Car- 
thage,Numidia,ByzJacenaiMauritaniay&c.  Yea  Leo  Q.P.inEpift.  adThom.&c, 
iaith  that  the  Bifhopof  Carthage  was  pofi  Pont.  Rom.  primus  Archiepifcopus 
&  totius  Africa  maxim  us  Metropolitans,  (  Though  yet  Binnius  truly  fay  that 
in  Cyprian's  time  he  was  not  an  Archbifhop,  that  is,  no  proper  Gover- 
nor of  Bifhops,  becaufe  they  concluded  in  Co\mci[>nemonoftrum  dicitur  E- 
pifeopus  Epifcoporum  •,  but  he  was  the  chief  of  that  great  Province.  And 
the  Dr.  himfelf  out  of  Victor  mentioneth  one  Creffeus  that  had  one  hun- 
dred and  twenty  Bifhops  under  him  :  He  was  Metropolitane  of  Aquitana 
and  a  Diocefs  then  having  many  Provinces-,how  many  be  in  a  Diocefs  Victor 
there  tells  yon  that  the  Bifhop  of  Carthage  in  his  own  Eugitane  Province  had 
one  hundred  fixtyfour  Bifhops.   And  how  great  were  their  Churches  then  ? 

and 


andL.  2.  when  he  lamenteth  the  great  number  of  their  baniftied,  Bifhops, 
Presbyters  aud  the  Church-members  were  4976.  And  oneParifh  here  hath 
40000  if  not  more.  He  that  confidereth  that  Cyrm  was  at  moft  but  60  miles 
from  Antiocb  the  Patriarchal  Seat,and  that  a  Carthage  Council  had  fometimes 
600  Bifhops,and  the  Donatifts  perhaps  had  as  many  ;  and  that  as  he  faith, 
Crefceus  had  one  hundred  and  twenty  Bifnops  under  him  ,  and  that  Cy- 
prian fo  often  tells  us  how  Bifhops  were  chofen  by  all  the  People,  and 
how  he  managed  his  Difcipline  in  the  prefence  of  ail  his  Plebs,  (Laity) 
and  by  their  confent ;  and  how  he  telleth  that  it  was  the  peoples  duty 
to  feparate  from  the  communion  of  a  finning  Bifhop  f  which  implieth 
communion  before)  and  how  the  Bifhops  in  Council  put  the  queftion, 
When  a  Church  wanted  a  Bifhop,  whether  one  of  them  that  was  a  Bifhop 
and  had  perhaps  but  one  or  two  or  three  Presbyters  was  bound  to  part 
with  one  to  that  wanting  Church  to  make.a  Bifhop  of?  aud  confidereth 
the  circuit  and  diftance  of  their  Cities,  and  much  more  which  I  have 
elfewhere  named,  may  well  believe  large  Provinces,  and  larger  Diocefles, 
but  will  think  of  their  Bifhops  Churches  as  we  muft  do  of  theirs  in  Ire- 
Und,  when  a  late  converted  Countrey  had  fix  hundred  Bifhops.  Make 
but  Chrifts  true  difcipline  practicable,  and  tie  us  not  to  fwear  or  aflent 
to  your  uncertain  forms  and  we  fhould«wo  further  trouble  you  in  this. 

Sett*  6.  As  for  the  credit  he  giveth  to  Syrm ondrf%  copy  of  Theodore^ 
Epiftle,  or  to  the  later  Editions  of  his  Works,  I  am  not  bound  to  be 
as  credulous,  nor  to  take  the  laft  Editions  for  the  belt,  when  they  come 
out  of  the  Jefuits  hands:  And  can  prove  the  Epiftle  to  Joh.Antioch^  which. 
Be/Iarmwe  wrould  difprove,  to  be  more  credible  than  this :  And  it's  one 
blot  that  he  faith  Ibeodorefs  Epilt.  6.  mentioneth  the  Metropolitane  he 
was  under,  when  he  was  under  none^  but  was  himfelf  an  Independant 
Metropolitane :  For  fo  the  NotitU  Epife.  tells  us,  was  Berytns,  Heliopolis> 
Laodicea,  Samafatay  Cyrosy  Pompriopofa,  Mopfucftia  and  Adama.  If  his 
Province  was  as  the  Epiftle  cited  faith  foitrty  Miles  fquare,.  andtheChrifti- 
ans  fo  numerous  asisfaid,  and  he  name  none  of  the  Bifnops  under  him, 
but  number  the  Churches,it:s  like  they  were  Epifcopal  Churches  and  very 
fmall.  Andthat  Filiates  badChurchss  it's  no  wonder  when  there  were  many 
Chorepifcopi  not  only  under  the  Metropolitans  but  the  City  Bifhops .  And 
why  1  muit  reject  his  long  received  AVork  if  1  queftion  his  late  found  Spi- 
ttles 1  know  not.But  again  I  fay,this  is  nothing  to  our  caufe,  being  fo  long 
after  the  ages  1  mentioned,&  my  contrary  evidence  beingnot  at  all  confuted 

His  confidence  p.  260, 26 1 .  about  fome  citations  out  of  Tbeodoret,  runs 
fcpon  falfe  Infinuations :  1.  That  the  queftion  is  not  of  the  number  of 
Churches,  but  about  the  extent  of  the  Epifcopal  Power,  whether  it  was 

limited 


[to4] 

limited  to  one  Parochial  Church,  or  extended  over  many :  when  he  know- 
eth  that  1  had  no  fuch  queftion  •,  but  whether  thofe  whofe  power  was 
over  many  Churches  in  the  firft  two  Centuries  at  lead,  had  not  as  many 
Bilhops  under  them  over  thofe  Churches  (if  fuch  there  were.)  Or  if  the 
Bilhops  were  of  the  loweft  rank,  whether  thofe  under  were  not  then  de- 
ny ed  to  be  Churches  for  want  of  Bilhops,  and  were  not  only  parts  of  a 
Church  T  2.  And  he  feigneth  me  to  bring  Theodoras  Testimonies  to 
prove  that  even  then  in  Alex,  and  Antioch  a  Church  was  but  one  Congre- 
gation, when  I  brought  it  only  to  prove,  that  even  in  that  age  they  were 
fo  fmali,  that  the  footfteps  of  the  ancient  (hape  of  themftill  appeared. 
Such  Fi&ions  may  deceive  them  that  will  not  try  what  is  faid,  but  only 
read  theanfwerer.  But  by  this  citation  I  fee  he  read  my  Treatife  of  £- 
fife,  before  his  Book  came  out.  And  therefore  1  will  pafs  by  thefe  nib- 
lings  till  he  anfwer  it- 

Sett.  7.  />.  26  2.  He  accufeth  me  of  [Rage  and  Bitterttefs]  for  faying 
that  [if  he  will  plead  for  fo  much  Frefumption,  Profanation  of  Gods  name, 
Vfurpation,  Vncharitablenefs  and  Schifmy  as  to  own  their  Churches  to  be  new9 
anddevifed  without  Gods  Authority ,  and  yet  may  in  his  name  be  impofedonthe 
World,  and  all  Dijfenters  called  Schifmatickj,~\  I  leave  him.  And  firft  he 
feigneth  that  1  charge  him  with  this*  which  is  untrue,  unlefs  he  will  charge 
himfelf  with  it.  But  why  do  I  put  in  [If  you  wllfo  plead.~\  Anf.  Becaufe 
he  accufed  me  for  faying  the  contrary,  viz*  [that  fo  to  divife,  and  fo 
to  impofe,  U  worfe>  &c.  But  becaufe  I  know  not  why  he  accufed  fo  plain  a 
truth,  I  faid  Sjf  you  dofo,"\  But  he  now  tells  me  that  he  (quoted  it  tofhew 
that  I  looked  on  all  Churches  beyond  Parochial,  as  Churches  meerly  of  mans  de- 
vifwg,)  which  is  another  untruth  confeifed  by  himfelf,  who  before  had 
this  up  ancf  cited  my  own  words  to  the  contrary  ;  «bc.  that  I  believe  the 
Catholick  Church  and  deny  not  National  aflbciated  Churches  •,  nor  Arch- 
bifhops  that  put  not  down  the  particular  Churches)Pafl:ors  and  Difcipline : 
one  miftake  is  his  excufe  for  another.  Had  he  meant  as  aforefaid,  had  my 
words  been  Rage,or  neceifary  confutation .? 

Se U.  8.  Yea  it  is  his  bufmefs  in  the  very  next  page  16  3  to  confute  his 
own  accufation  of  me  by  citing  my  own  conceilions.  And  p.  264.  he 
giveth  me  leave  to  call  our  Bifhops  Archbifhops.  Anf.  But  1.  Archbi- 
fhops  have  Churches  with  their  proper  Bifhops  under  them.  But  our 
Bi(hops  fay  that  there  are  no  fuch  under  them.  2.  I  told  you  before  that 
as  the  Major  General,  Quartermafter  General,  &c.  of  an  Army  confti- 
tuteth  not  adiftindt  body  from  the  Army  and  the  particular  Regiments 
and  Troops,  fo  I  am  not  certain  that  Apoftles  or  Evangelifts  or  any  ge- 
neral Preachers  as  fuch,  did  conftitute  any  ChurchFonn  diftinft  from  the 

Catholick 


•         C  105  1 

Catholick  and  the  particular  Bilhops  Churches ;  But  if  they  are  fuppo- 
fed  to  have  taken  their  feveral  fixed  Provinces  (which  I  never  faw  pro- . 
ved)  I  will  not  contend  whether  thofe  Provinces  may  be  called  Churches. 
If  we  agree  about  the  thing,  life  the  name  as  you  fee  caufe. 

Sett.  9.  And  to  your  talk  of  our  Bilhops  being  of  the  fame  fort,  I  ask 
you  whether  any  of  the  Bifhops  for  300  years,  or  for  long  after  fave 
Cyril  Alexand.  by  violence,  did  ever  ufe  or  claim  any  power  over  any 
Minifters  or  Chriltians,  befides  meer  fatherly  Teaching,  Perfwading, 
urging  Gods  Word  on  them,  and  applying  it  to  the  confciences  of  par- 
ticular Perfons  by  Admonitions,  verbal  Cenfures  and  Abfolutions?  Did 
they  meddle  by  Force,  with  Body  or  Purfe  ?  Let  your  Bifhops  ufe  no  o- 
ther  force  or  way  of  conftraint  than  the  Apoftles  did,  (if  they  be  their 
Succeflbrs)  and  not  lay  the  excommunicate  in  Prifons  and  ruine  their 
Bodies  and  Eftates,  &  valeat  qmntum  valere  potefi.  But  Mr.  Glanvile 
and  many  of  you  tell  us,  how  little  you  care  for  it  without  the 
Sword. 

Sell.  10.  If  any  man  will  but  confider  what  I  cited  out  of  Greg.  Nazj,- 
arisen  that  faith  Men  unfit  were  fo  ambitious  to  be  of  the  Clergy,  'that  the 
Clergy  was  in  many  Churches  almoft  as  many  as  the  Laity  ;  And  that  Pres- 
byters then  were  much  like  the  Presbyterians  Elders,  fave  that  they 
had  the  power  of  Word  and  Sacraments  though  they  feldom  exercifed 
Preaching  in  Cities,  but  left  that  to  the  Bilhop  *,  and  that  the  number  of 
their  Acoluthi,  Exorcifta,  Oftiarii,  Lettores,  Snbdiacom,  Diacom,  &c.  made 
up  the  great  body  of  them.  And  the  very  Boys  and  Schollars  that  were 
bred  up  under  them,  yea  or  but  for  Church-finging,  arefometimes  joyn- 
cd  to  make  upthenumber,fee  Jfidor.  deOffic.  Eccl.  L.  2.  even  all  the  Monks, 
are  often  numbred  with  them.  And  Vtihr  cited  by  him  feemeth  to  num- 
ber twice  the  Infamdi  fo  bred  up  with  the  great  number  of  Readers,  to 
theC*rthage  Clergy,  I  fay  he  that  confiders  all  this,  will  not  judge  of  the 
number  of  people  or  Churches  by  the  number  of  the  Clergy,  as  he  would 
do  now  with  us ,  where  the  great  Parhhes  have  but  two  or  three 
Prkfts. 

Sett.  1 1 .  And  as  to  the  caufe  that  I  plead  for,  it  is  enough  that  T  have 
proved  that  even  when  the  name  of  Bilhop  was  confined  to  the  Epifcopi  Pa- 
ftorumy  yet  the  Presbyters  had  the  power  of  the  Keys,  and  were  Epif- 
copiGregis^  and  exercifed  this  power  in  their  diftantCountrey  aflemblies, 
though  under  the  Bimop,  and  the  Bifhop  was  to  exercife  his  with  them 
as  Afliftants  -0  (6  that  the  particular  Churches  were  not  reallyunchurched. 

Sett.  12.  p.  265.  He  cometh  nearer  our  controverfie,  but  firlt  fahly 
ftateth  the  queltion,  fuppofing  that  I  fay  that  (the  whole  power  of  the  Pres- 

P  hytcrs 


byters  is  fwallowd  up  by  the  Bijhops.)  And  is  the  difputing  of  a  queltion 
falfly  ftated  of  any  profit  ?  I  only  faid  that  the  office  of  a  Church-Paftor 
or  Presbyter  hath  three  efTential  parts,  viz..  the  power  of  Teaching  the 
Church,  of  conducting  them  in  Worlhip,  and  Governing  the  people  by 
the  ufe  of  the  Keys.  And  that  he  that  deftroyeth  one  part  that  is  elTen- 
tial (though  he  fwallow  not  up  all  the  power)  altereth  the  eflence  of  the 
Office  :  and  that  fo  the  Englifh  Diocefan  Form  doth,  I  have  largely  pro- 
ved in  my  Treat,  of  Epifcopacy  which  he  doth  not  anfwer. 

Sett.  13.  1 .  He  tells  us  that  the  Presbyters  are  the  lower  houfe  in  the 
Convocation,  and  fo  have  their  Votes  in  pajftng  all  the  Rules  of  Difcipline^ 
Articles  of  Dottrine  and  Forms  of  divine  Service. ~]  Anf.  1.  According  to 
his  defcription  the  Church  of  England  hath  no  one  EccleJiafticalG 'overnment ^ei- 
ther Monarchical  or  Ariftocratical  or  Democratical :  And  therefore  the 
Acts  of  the  Convocation  are  no  Acts  of  governing  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land ,  but  meer  Agreements.  Therefore  this  proveth  not  the  Presby- 
ters power  of  governing  it.  2.  If  this  be  a  part  of  Government 
it  is  the  Legifhtive  Part  or  the  Executive.  The  later  it  is  not.  The  former 
the  Lawyers  fay  it  is  not  *,  King  and  Parliament  only  being  Legiflators. 
But  if  this  be  Legiflation,  we  deny  it  to  be  any  of  the  power  of  the 
Keys,  in  queltion,  which  is  but  to  judge  who  is  fit  or  unfit  for  Church- 
communion,to  Admonifh,  Abfolve  or  Excommunicate  according  to  Chrifts 
Law }  and  is  the  execution  of  Chrifts  Law,and  not  the  making  of  new  Laws, 
3.  It  is  lis  fubjudke  whether  the  things  here  named  be  any  part  of  true 
lawful  Church-Government.1  Rules  of  Difcipline  Chrift  hath  made 
enough,  except  about  meer  mutable  Accidents.  Articles  of  Do^rine 
man  muft  not  otherwife  make,  than  to  declare  what  he  believeth  Chrift 
hath  made.  Forms  of  Divine  Service  commanded  to  all  others,  the  Apo- 
files  never  made,  nor  that  we  find  appointed  any  others  to  make  them. 
If  thefe  be  lawful  by  way  of  agreement  of  many  Churches,  this  is  none 
of  the  Power  we  fpeak  of.  Yet  he  calls  this  [fib of  thegreatejl  Rights  of 
Government^  viz.  making  Rules  for  the  whole  body  ,  which  he  denyeth  to 
have  any  conftitutive  Government. 

Seci.  1 4.  He  faith,  [In  this  main  part  of  Government  our  Church  falls  behind 
none  of  the  ancient  Churches — only  there  they  were  taken  fingly  in  every  City^  &C 
Anf  That  is,  1.  When  the  Minifters  of  a  Diocefs  choofe  four,  out  of 
whom  the  Bifhops  take  two,  And  2.  This  only  to  make  agreements,with- 
ant  any  governing  power  over  the  Church  of  England,  3.  And  this  on- 
ly about" general  Regulation.  4.  In  either  unlawful  or  doubtful  Impoii- 
tionson  others  about  meer  Accidents  or  Circumltantes  of  Order;  This  is 
the  lame  or  as  good  as,  when  every  true  Church  hath  prefent  Paftors 

perfonaHy 


C  107] 

perfonally  toexercife  the  executive  Church- Government  called  the  Keys, 
by  the  Laws  of  Chrift  already  made,  in  judging  the  cafe  of  each  parti- 
cular Perfon ,  as  to  his  Title  to  Church-communion  and  the  King- 
dom of   Heaven.    For  that  is  the   thing   which    by  us  is  pleaded 

for. 

Sett.  1 5.  Next  he  tells  US  of  four  that  are  to  joy  n  in  Ordinatiom  and  Exa- 
mination, when  1.  It  is  not  the  making  or  governing  of  Pallors  which 
Iamfpeaking  of,  but  the  Government  of  the  Flocks.  2.  He  know- 
eth  thatitis  no  ftrange  thing  for  our  Bi(hopsto  fay,  that  both  in  Convo- 
cations and  Ordination,  the  Presbyters  aft  only  as  the  Bilhops  Council, 
and  the  Bifhops  only  aft  by  governing  authority.  3.  I  never  difputed 
for  Presbyters  Power  to  ordain  as  efTential  to  them  f  nor  did  I  ever  med- 
dle in  any  Ordination.)  4.  If  four  Presbyters  have  fuch  power  that  pro- 
veth  not  that  four  hundred  have  it,  that  never  exercife  it,  in  the  fame 
Diocefs.  5.  If  by  all  this  you  mean  that  really  Presbyters  have  the  go- 
verning Power  of  the  Keys,  it  condemneth  thole  the  more  that  give  it  to 
four  and  deny  it  to  four  hundred  or  one  thoufand.  6.  When  I  was  or- 
dained none  examined  us  but  the  Bilhops  Chaplain,  and  two  or  three  City 
Minifters  called  by  the  Bifhop  that  never  fawus  before,  meerly  fro  form* 
laid  hands  on  us  with  him.  But  it's  well  that  you  give  fuch  a  power  to 
ordain. 

Sect.  16.  Next  p.  267.  he  comes  to  the  point  in  queftion,  whether 
they  have  the  Paftoral  Power  of  the  Keys  over  their  own  Flocks  ?  And 
I .  He  faith,  One  would  thinkjbe  objettor  had  never  read  over  the  office  of  Or' 
dinationfor  them.  For  the  Eptftle  is  read,  the  Charge  given  by  St.  Paul  u 
the  Elders  at  Miletus  Aft  2p,  or  the  third  Chapter  of  1  Tim.  concerning  the 
Office  of  a  Bifhop.  What  a  great  Impertinency  had  this  been,  &c  ?  Anf.  This  is 
like  the  reft.  I  mult  not  fuppofe  that  he  never  read  it  himfelf.  Sec  Rea- 
der, whether  any  of  thffbe  true  ?  Indeed  heretofore  it  was  in  the  Book 
of  Ordination  -0  but  we  (hewed  the  Bilhops  that  thence  Bifhop  Vffier  in 
his  Reduction  argued  that  the  Presbyters  have  fome  conjunft  Power  with  the 
Bilhops  to  govern  their  own  particular  Flocks,  and  fome  true  Paftoral 
Power  of  the  Keys  (I  was  one  that  oft  urged  it  on  them.)  And  they 
told  us  that  the  Bifhop  was  the  Paftorand  they  but  his  Curates,  and  to 
confute  US,  put  out  both  thefe  parts  of  Scripture  from  the  Book^which  he  faith 
are  in  it  •,  fo  that  neither  of  them  is  there  :  And  prefently  they  alfb  put 
out  the  very  name  of  Paftor  given  to  Parifh  Minifters,  in  almoft  all  places 
of  the  Liturgy.     Doth  not  all  this  fhew  their  mind  ? 

Sett.  17.  Next  he  tells  us  of  the  Bifhops  Exhortation,  calling  them 
\jhc  Meffiengers,  Watchmen,  Paftors  and  Stewards  of  the  Lord.^     Anf.  It  Was 

P  2        '  fo 


[  108  ] 

fo  in  the  old  Book,  But  the  word  (Pafiors)  here  alfo  is  purpofely  put 
out  to  (hew  their  judgment.  Is  this  juft  dealing ,  And  doth  it  not  confute 
himfelf?  3.  He  tells  US  of  the  Promife  to  Minifies  Doctrine,  Sacraments 
and  DifcipHneJ\  Anf  The  truth  is  neither  in  the  exhortation  nor  colla- 
tion of  Orders,  is  there  any  mention  of  any  power  given  him  to  govern, 
but  only  to  adminifter  the  Wordand  Sacraments :  and  thus  far  the  peo- 
ple are  called  his  charge  :  But  in  the  queftion,  Difcipline  is  named  thus 
[as  the  Lord  hath  commanded^  and  as  this  Church  and  Realm  hath  received  the 
fame,  according  to  the  Commandements  of  God  :  ]  fo  that  1 .  The  Prieft  here- 
by  OWneth  that  as  it  is  receivedinthis  Church  and  Realm  it  is  according  to  Gods 
Commandments,  and  2.  Then  promifeth  fo  to  ufe  it :  which  is  1.  To  be 
an  Accufer,  2.  And  as  a  Cryer  to  publilh  the  Bi(hops  or  Lay-Chancellors 
Excommunication  and  Ahfolutions.     This  is  the  promife. 

Seek.  1 8.  And  what  if  the  name  of  Government  or  the  Keys  had  been  put 
in ,  when  it  is  denyed  in  its  elfential  part  ?  I  have  proved  out  of  Coufins 
Tables,  Zouchy  and  the  Canons  and  actual  Judgment  and  Practice  of  the 
Bifhop.,  that  Government  or  Jurifdiction  is  denyed  to  them  :  And  in- 
ftanced  in  many  and  moftadts  in  which  it  doth  conlift,  in  my  Treatife  of 
Epifcopacy.  And  this  being  my  queftion,  ("whether  the  Eagliib  frame 
depofe  not  the  ancient  Churches  (which  had  every  one  their  own  Paftor 
with  the  power  of  the  Keys)  and  fo  the  ancient  Offices  and  Difcipline.) 
I  am  not  now  concerned  about  the  General  Archiepifcopal  Power  of  the 
Diocefans. 

Set?.  19.  p.  269.  He  faith  (that  while  the  Apoflles  lived  it  is  probable  then 
were  no  fixed  Bifltopf,  or  but  few.)  Anf.  Mark  this  Reader,  u  If  fo,  then 
while  they  lived,  there  were  but  twelve  or  thirteen  Bilhops  in  the  World,. 
if  any.  And  were  then  no  more  Churches  that  had  governing  Pallors  ? 
2.  Then  if  it  cannot  be  proved  that  the  Apoflle^were  fixed  Bifhops,  but: 
ambulatory  Apoltles,  there  were  none  in  the  \rorld  in  their  times.  3. 
Then  the  Angels  of  the  feven  Churches  were  Apoftles  (reprehended  l.y 
Chiift)  or  meer  Presbyters,  or  of  the  few  excepted  B  (hops.  Why 
then  doth  he  himfelf elfewhere  argue  that  there  were  Bilhops  then,  becaufe 
thefe  Cities  were  Metropoles  ?  4.  See  what  concord  is  between  the  chief 
Doctors  of  the  Churchof  England.  Dr.  Hammond  faith  that  it  cannot  be 
proved  that  there  were  any  Presbyters  but  Bitbops  in  Scripture  times : 
and  fhppofeth  theEpifcopal  Party  of  his  mind.  This  Dr.  faith,  (It's 
probable  there  were  no  fixed  Bijlwps,  or  but  few*  And  fo  they  differ.  1 .  Of  the 
fence  of  the  Texts  that  mention  Presbyters  and  Bilhops.  2.  And  abous 
the  guidance  of  the  Churches  defatlo  in  thofe  times.  3.  And  if  the  Ar- 
pofties  were  ngt  fixed  Billiops  of  fiugle  Churches,  they  have  no  Sncceilbrs 

as 


C  m  1 

as  fuch.  If  they  were  we  mull  have  but  twelve  or  thirteen  Bifhops  as 
their  Succefibrs  in  the  World.  And  which  be  thofe  Seats  ?  and  how  prove 
they  their  claim  ? 

Sett.  10.  To  prove  the  Parifh  Minifters  Paftoral  Power/?.  272.  he  tells 
US  of  that  he  is  judge  of  the  Qualification  of  thofe  that  are  ta  be  confirmed.   A/if 
1.  Had  I  ever  taken  a  Pariih  Charge  under  them,  1  would  have  taken 
more  advantage  from  the  new  Rubrike  about  this,than  any  thing  elfe.and 
then  the  Bifhops  intended.     But  1.  There  is  not  one  of  a  multitude  con- 
firmed, and  defire  of  Confirmation  proveth  notanyunderilandingofChri- 
ftianity.     2.  And  if  the  Minifter  doubt  whether  they  be  Ready  or  capa- 
ble, they  may  refufe  to  give  him  any  account.     3-  He  is  to  fend  in  the 
names  of  fuch  as  he  judgethfit.  But  1.  it's  only  when  the  Biihop  Summons 
them.     2.  And  the  Bifhop  is  no  way  obliged  to  confirm  no  more  than  the 
Priell  appro vcth  of.   To  prove  this,  1.  Their  ordinary  pra^ice  is  to  con- 
firm without  the  Curates  hands  .•  2.  When  the  Kings  Declaration  was  de- 
bated at  Worccfter  Houfe  i6<5r,  before  the  K.  Lords,  Bifhops  and  Mini- 
fters, I  laboured  almoft  only  for  this  that  day,  to  have  got  in  the  word 
(Confer*)  of  the  Minifter  of  the  Pariih  for  fuch  as  fhould  be  Confirmed, 
fuppofing  that  one  word  would  have  partly  reftored  the  Parifh  Pallors  pow- 
er, and  fo  have  made  our  Biihops  tolerable  Archbifhops,  that  if  poiTible 
we  might  have  been  healed.     But  the  Bifhops  rejected  it  with  all  their 
might,  and  got  the  King  to  refufe  it :  But  becaufe  I  laid  fo  great  a  ftrefs 
on  it,  the  Lords  and  others  that  were  to  collect  and  publifti  the  Concef- 
fions,  when  we  were  gone  put  it  in  for  that  time,  and  at  the  Convocation 
the  Bifhops  call  it  all  away.    Did  they  not  tell  us  then  their  fence  ?  And 
they  call  him  only  the  date  of  the  Pariih,  and  not  the  Paftor.     And  4. 
If  this  were  practicable  fonz  good  m:n  would  p;actice  it,  at  leaft  this 
Doctor  himfelf  :  But  I  never  heard  of  one  that  pre-examined  his  Com- 
municants whether  they  ^cre  ready  and  willing  to  be  Confirmed.      }.    And  it 
he  did,  he  would  keep  away  many  fit  Perfons,  that  fcruple  our  fort  of 
Confirmation.     6.  And  what  is  all  this  to  the  many  thoufand  Noncom- 
municants,who  quietly  remain  members  oPyour  Churches  ? 

Sett.  21.  As  to  his  wordsp.  275.  of  power  to  keep  the  fcandalous  from 
the  Sacrament,  1  have  in  fo  many  books  proved  it  next  to  none,  and  ut- 
terly infufficient,  that  I  will  not  wall  time  to  repeat  all  here. 

Sett.  22.  Heteils  me  that  in  Cxn.  26  is  not  in  Reformatio  txgwn  Ecchf 
j4nf  But  I  have  before  told  him,  how  much  more  and  better  is,  which 
would  go  far  to  heal  us  could  we  obtain  it.  He  faith  that  \_any  one  that  hath 
feen  them  knowethit  to  be  a  miftakt,  to  fay  it  waipMjhed  by  Job:  Fox.     Anf 

His  Reader  mud  be  a  ftrong  believer,  and  taken  uchon  his  word ;  \.  I 

ha^a 


[lio] 

have  feen  them,  and  fpake  with  men  of  great  understanding  that  have  feen 
them,  that  yet  judge  it  no  miftake.  2.  The  Preface  of  the  publifher  is 
like  his  Style.  3.  It  is  called  Prtfatio  I.  F.  Andean  every  Reader  know 
thati.  F.  meanethnoty^Fo*.?  4.  Ordinary  Tradition  faith  it  was  John 
Foxs  :  And  what  Ihonid  I  fooner  believe  in  fuch  a  cafe  ?  Inftead  of  pro- 
ving that  they  have  all  a  power  (to  their  condemnation)  which  we  fee 
they  exercife  not,  let  him  procure  a  real  power  declared  and  granted,  and 
it  will  do  more  than  thefe  words. 

Sett.  23.  But  when  it  comes  to  the  queftion  whether  me  may  fo  much 
as  call  a  finner  to  repentance  by  name  before  the  Church,  who  reje&eth  all 
more  private  admonition,  he  puts  the  queltion,  whether  the  obligation 
to  admonifh  publicity  an  offender,  or  to   deny  him  the  Sacrament  if  he  will 
come  to  it*  be  fo  great  as  to  bear  him  out  in  the  violation  of  a  Law,  made  by 
fublkk  authority,  &c.  Anf.  The  firft  queftion  is  whether  Chrift  have  not 
made  his  Church  fo  different  a  thing  from  the  World,  that  they  ihould 
be  openly  differenced,  by  a  Communion  of  Saints  ?  2.  And  whether  he 
hath  not  inftituted  an  office  to  judge  of  this  and  by  Government  exe- 
cute it  ?    And  3.  Whether  any  man  have  authority  to  fufpend  this 
Law  or  Office?  And  then  4.  I  (hall  grant  that  not  only  Difcipline,  but 
Preaching  and  Prayer  and  Sacraments  may  be  forborn  hie  &  nmc  in  the 
prefent  exercife,  when  elfe  the  exercife  would  do  more  hurt  than  good. 
5.  But  are  thefe  Laws  good  that  forbid  it  f  and  fhould  we  Covenant  ne- 
ver to  endeavour  an  Alteration! 

Sett.  24.  He  next  tells  us  of  the  great  difficulty  of  exercifing  true 
Difcipline,  ( which  is  molt  true)  and feems  thence  to  defend  the  forbear- 
ance of  it  with  u>.  Anfw-  I  have  in  my  Treatife  of  Epifcopacy  and 
oft  proved  that  it  is  of  great  importance  to  Chrift's  ends,  and  that  he 
would  have  it  continued  to  the  laft,  and  that  the  Communion  of  Saints 
is  a  practical  Article  of  Faith ;  and  that  making»fmali  difference  between 
the  Church  and  the  World,  tends  to  Church  deftruftion,  and  to  the  re- 
proach of  Chrift ianity,  and  [he  utter  undoing  of  millions  of  Souls. 

And  though  Pope  and  Prelates  have  abufed  it  to  captivate  Princes  and 
Nations,  the  juft  nfe  of  it  (he  knowethj  is  mentioned  by  the  Univer- 
sal Church,  and  vifibly  recorded  in  the  Canons  of  the  feveral  ages. 
Though  fome  Eraftians  are  of  late  againft  it  *,  And  Jefuits  aud  world- 
ly Proteftants  can  difpenfe  with  it  when  it  would  hurt  their  worldly 
Intereft,  and  turn  it  chiefly  againft  Gods  Servants  that  difpleafe  and 
crofs  them. 

Sett.  25.  f*   2S4.  He  faith  ,  £Ihe  mm  of  Difcipline  in  the  Parifh 

Churches 


Luij 

Churches  was  never  thought  by  old  Nonconformists  deftrnttive  to  the  being 
of  them* 

Anfw.  They  did  not  confound  the  Tower  and  the  Exercife:  Nor 
what  the  Minifiers  office  is  indeed  and  from  God,  and  what  it  is  by  the 
Bifhops  Mind  and  Rules  of  Conformity.  I  fay  as  they,  i .  The  £.v- 
erctje  may  be  fufpended  without  nulling  the  Tower  or  Policy.  2. 
They  are  true  Paftors  and  Churches  by  Gods  will,  againft  the  will  of 
thofe  that  would  degrade  them. 

Sell.  264  But  fappofing  every  man  left  to  his  own  Consciences  for  Com- 
munion,  1 .  He  faith  the  greateft  Offenders  generally  excommunicate  them- 
felves. 

Anfw.  1.  And  is  it  your  way  to  leave  all  the  reft  to  their  Conferen- 
ces, and  yet  to  preach  and  write  againft,  and  lay  in  Jail  diflenting 
godly  People  that  communicate  not  with  you  ?  2.  And  are  not  all 
thefe  Offenders  (till  Members  of  your  Church  ?  Albajpineus  complain- 
eth  of  their  Roman  French  Church,  that  he  never  knew  any  further 
caft  out  than  from  thQ  Sacrament,  and  left  ftill  to  other  parts  of  com? 
munion  as  Members  *,  And  fo  do  you  by  thoufands  who  are  all  Sons  of 
your  Church  ;  but  we  are  none. 

He  is  again  at  it,  what  Church  I  was  of  and  I  have  told  him  oft 
enough. 


CHAP. 


[  m  ] 


CHAP.     V  1 1 1. 

What  the  National  Church  of  England  is  ? 

;Sdh.  i.  A  Ccording  to  the  Doflors  Method  we  $ome  now  to  the 
JlV  Explication  of  one  of  the  terms  of  our  Controverfie,  fo 
long  and  loudly  called  for,  viz,,  what  the  National  Church  of  England  is, 
which  we  mufi  obey,  and  from  which  we  are  faid  to  feparate,  p.  287.  And 
theanfwerisfuchasmay  tell  Dr.  Fidwood  and  him,  that  it's  time  to  give 
over  wondering  that  I  understood  not  what  they  meant  by  it. 

Sett.  2.  Our  queftion  is  of  the  Church  Policy  and  Political  Form. 
All  writers  of  Politicks  difference  a  meer  Community  y  from  a  Political  Bo- 
dy :  This  is.effentiated  of  the  two  constitutive  Parts,  the  Pars  Kegens 
and  Pars  fubdita  :  the  former  is  much  like  the  Soul,  and  the  later  the 
Body.  The  Ruling  Part  is  called  the  Form  by  molt,  and  the  forts  (Mo- 
narchkal,  Anfocraticaly  Democratical  or  mixt)  the  form  in  Specie^  as  the 
rational  or  fenfitive  Soul  to  Animals  :  But  the  Relative  Form  is  the  V- 
nion  of  both  in  their  proper  order.  Such  a  body  Politick  is  a  Kingdom, 
a  City,  a  Church  in  the  proper  and  ufual  fenfe. 

,  But  in  a  Ioofe  fenfe  many  other  things  may  be  called  a  Church.  As  1 . 
a  Community  prepared  for  a  governing  Form,  not  yet  received.  2.  An 
occalional  Congregation  about  Religion  fas  Prifoners  that  pray  toge- 
ther ,  Men  that  meet  abouc  a  Religious  Confutation  or  Difpute,  &c.) 
3.  Many  Churches  as  under  one  Chriftian  Magistrate  as  an  accidental 
Head.  4.  Many  Churches  alTociated  for  mutual  help  and  concord, 
without  any  governing  Head  :  Either  of  one  Kingdom  or  of  many. 
5.  Many  Churches  as  meerly  agreeing  in  Judgment  and  Love,  in  di- 
stant parts  of  the  World.  None  of  thefe  are  Churches  in  the  poli- 
tical Senfe,  but  are  equivocally  fo  called. 

But  Politically,  j.  All  the  Chriftian  World  is  one  Church  as  formed 
by  their  Relation  toChrift  the  Head.  2.  All  fingle  Churches  that  have 
Paltors  to  guide  them  in  the  EfTentials  of  the  Paftoral  Office,  are  true 
Churches,  formed  by  this  mutual  Relation.     Thefe  two  are  undoubted. 

3.  The 


(  M3  ) 

j.  The  now  Rotnan-Catholid^Church  is  one  by  Ufurpation,  as  in- 
formed by  one  llfurping  head. 

4.  A  Patriarchal  Church  is  one,  as  Governed! by  a  Patriarch. 

5.  A  Provincial  Church  is  one  as  headed  by  the  Metropolitan, 
or  as  mixt  where  Ariftocratically  others  are  joyned  with  him. 

6.  An  Archiepifcopal  or  Diocefan  Church  that  hath  particular 
Churches  andBifhops  under  it  is  one  as  headed  by  that  Diocefane. 
( Jure  an  injuria  I  difpute  not.) 

7.  A  Diocefane  Church  of  many  fcore  or  hundred  Parishes,  ha- 
ving no  Epifcopus  Gregis,  or  true  Paftorsaid  Paftoral  Churches  un- 
der him,  but  only  half  Paftors  and  Chappels  that  are  but  partes 
Ecclefw,  is  one,  even  of  the  loweft  fort,  in  their  opinion,  as  head- 
ed by  that  Diocefane. 

8.  A  Presbyterian  Clafllcal  Church  is  one,  as  headed  by  the  Claf- 
fes. 

9.  A  Presbyterian  National  Church  is  one,  as  headed  by  the  Ge- 
neral AfTembly. 

10.  An  Epifcopal  National  Church  is  one,  either  as  headed  by 
one  National  Bifhop,  or  elfe  by  a  Synod  of  Biihops  Ariftocratical- 
ly ,  or  elfe  by  a  Synod  of  Biinops  and  Presbyters  Ariftocratical- 
ly. All  thefe  that  are  conftituted  of  One  Regent  and  a  fubdite  Part^ 
are  called  Churches  in  a  Political  proper  fenfe,  and  not  only  equi- 
vocally. 

Now  the  Qoeftion  is,,  Of  which  fort  is  the  National  Church  of 
England  ? 

And  the  Doctor  faith,  page  287.  1.  That  the  Society  of  all  Chrifti- 
ans  is  counted  a  true  Catholic!^  Church,  from  their  Vnion  and  Confent 
in  fome  common  things:   and  fo  is  ours-,  &c7\ 

Anfo.  But  in  what  common  things  ?  Not  in  one  Bible,  for  fo  may  He- 
reticks,  much  lefs  in  one  Liturgy.  If  it  be  not  a  confent  in  one  Go- 
verning Head,  it  makes  no  proper  Church. 

2.  He  fuppoleth  an  agreement  in  the  fame  Faith,  and  under  the 
fame  Government  and  Difcipline. 

j4nfxv.  That's  right:  But  what  Government  is  it,  Civil,  or  Ecclc- 
fiaftical  f  The  firft  is  no  effential  part  of  a  proper  Church.  If  it  be 
the  later,  is  it  one  in  fpecie  or  in  individuo  politico  ?  Not  the  former ; 
for  a  100  Epifcopal  Churches  in  feveral  Nations  may  have  one  fpe- 
cies  of  Government,  as  many  Kingdoms  may  have.  It  is  therefore  tht 
later  that  is  all  ray  Qieftion,  which  is  the  Church-Head  f 

0^  /  He 


("4) 

He  faith  £  As  feveral  Families  make  one  Kingdom,  fo  fever al  hjfer 
Churches  make  one  National. 

Anfw.  True,  if  that  National  Church  have  one  Conftitutive  Head 
as  a  Family  hath :  It's  no  Family  without  a  Pater  or  Mater  Familias. 
And  no  Governed  proper  Church  without  Governours  *,  and  there  is 
no  Governour  where  there  is  no  fupreme  in  his  place  and  kind.- 
For  inferiours  have  all  their  power  from  the  fupreme  .•  There  is 
no  Univerfal  fupreme  but  God ;  but  the  King  is  fubordinately  the  fo- 
preme  in  his  Kingdom  in  refpeft  to  inferiours,  and  fo  it  is  in  other 
Governed  Societies. 

He  addeth  [The  name  of  a  Church  comprehended  the  Ecclefiafiical  Go* 
vernours  and  People  of  whole  Cities,  and  fo  may  he  extended  to  many  Cities 
united  under  one  Civil  Government ,  and  the  fame  rules  of  Religion* 

Anfw.  i.  If  thequeftion  were  only  de  nomine,  we  grant  that  Ci- 
vil Courts  even  of  Heathens  are  ufually  by  Writers  called  Ecclefi*, 
and  fo  is  any  AfFembly.    If  this  be  all  you  mean,  fpeak  out. 

2.  Many  Nations  may  agree  in  the  fame  Rules  of  Religion,  yea> 
fo  all  Chriftians  do :  Doth  this  eonftitute  National  Churches  ? 

3.  One  Civil  Government  is  of  another  fpecies,  and  not  effential 
but  accidental  to  a  Church,  and  therefore  doth  not  eonftitute  or 
individuate  it .-  One  juftice  of  Peace  or  Mayor  in  a  Chriftian  Cop 
poration,  doth  not  make  it  one  Parift  Church.  But  if  this  be  all 
your  meaning,  fpeak  out :  we  grant  de  re  a  Chriftian  Kingdom*, 
arnd  contend  not  de  nomine  if  you  call  it  a  Church. 

§.  3.  page  297.  I.  As  to  the  difference  of  a  National  Church  and 
Kingdom,  he  granteth  what  we  defire,  confefling  the  difference.  But 
asketh  [whence  cometh  all  this  z.eal  now  againft  a  National  Church?2 

Anfw,  An  untrue  infinuation. 

i.   To  defire  to  know  what  it  is,  is  untruly  called  zeal  againft  it. 

2.  And  agreeing  with  you  in  the  defcription  is  no  zeal  againft  it. 

He  adds  [The  Presbyterians  and  Mr.  Hudfon  write  for  it. 

Anfw.  Mr.  Hudfon  is  a  Conformift  :  And  the  Presbyterians  tell 
you  what  they  mean,  a  Chriftian  Nation  of  particular  Churches  Go- 
verned by  One  General  Afferably  as  the  Supreme  Ecclefiaftical  Go- 
vernment. Whether  this  be  juft  or  unjuft  is  now  none  of  our  que- 
stion. I  have  oft  told  what  I  think  of  it.  Do  you  alfo  tell  us  which 
is  your  National  Church-power  and  I  have  done?  Are  yon  loth  to 
be  underftood? 

§•  4-  But. 


(  i^) 

§.  4.  But  page  299.  He  cometh  to  his  plain  Anfwer,  viz.  1.  [7he 
National  Church  of  England  diffupve  is  the  whole  Body  of  Chriftians  in 
this  Nation,  confifting  of  Pafiors  and  People,  agreeing  in  that  Faith,  Go- 
vernment andworflrip  which  are  eflablijhed  by  the  Laws  of  this  Realm-'} 
And  now  he  [continues  his  wonder  at  thofe  who  fo  confidently  fayy  they 
cannot  teR  what  we  mean  by  the  Church  of  England.] 

Anfw.  Yea,  your  wonder  may  increafe,  that  i  lefs  and  lefs  under- 
ftand  it,  if  you  did  not  after  tell  us  better  than  in  this  unhappy  de- 
finition. 

1.  Is  this  called  the  Church  diffufive  one  Governed  body  Politick?  it 
nor,  it  is  no  Church  in  the  fenfe  in  queftion,  and  l'le  not  ftick  with 
you  for  an  equWocal  name 

2.  Do  you  mean  by  [Government  agreed  in.  1.  The  Civil  Govern- 
ment. 2.  Or  the  Ecclefiaftical  Government  of  the  particular  Chur- 
ches feverally.    3.  Or  one  Government  of  all  the  National  Church  ? 

1.  The  firft  makes  it  no  Church  in  the  fenfe  inqueftion. 

2.  The  fecond  makes  it  no  Church,  but  an  Aflbciation  of  many 
Churches,  fuch  as  a  thoufand  Independent  Churches  may  make, 
or  the  Churches  of  many  Kingdoms.  Many  Families  AfTociated  are 
no  City  or  one  ruled  Society  if  they  agree  in  no  Common  Gover- 
nours,  but  only  their  feveral  Family  Governours.  Many  Cities  af- 
fociated  are  no  Commonwealth  if  they  agree  not  in  one  fupreme 
power.  If  s  no  political  body  without  one  common  Governour, 
Natural  or  Colk&ive,  Monarchical,  Ariftocratical  or  Democra- 
tical. 

And  what  is  it  of  [Worfiip  eflablifloed  by  Law}  that  individuates 
your  Church  ?    If  all  that  the  Law  hath  'eftablifhed. 

1.  Your  Church  hath  oft  changed  its  very  being,  and  may  do  at 
every  Parliament. 

2.  And  the  Church  is  fmall  and  unknown,  if  all  that  differ  in 
any  point  eftablifhed  are  no  parts  of  it.  But  if  it  be  not  all  efta- 
blifhed, who  knoweth  by  this  definition  what  it  is,  and  what  is  the 
very  matter  of  your  Church.  So  that  here  is  a  definition  which  nei- 
ther notifieth  matter  or  form. 

J.  5.  Next  he  anfwereth  the  Qieftion,  How  all  the  Congregations 
in  England  make  up  this  one  Church?}  and  anfwereth  [By  Vnity  of 
Confenty  as  all  particular  Churches  make  one  Catholick^  } 

Q  2  Anfw. 


(  W ) 

Anfw-  Confcnt  to  what?  i.  If  it  be  not  to  one  common  Govern- 
ment, it  is  no  Governed  Church,  as  one.  2.  Doth  he  think  that  the 
Catholick  Church  confenteth  not  to  one  Governing  Head,  Chrifl  *  And 
doth  any  thing  elfe  make  them  formally  One  Politick  body  or* 
Church  ?  This  were  ill  Dodtrine. 

§.  6.  Queftion,  How  comes  it  to  be  One  National  Church?  (Saithhe) 
/  fay  becaufe  it  was  received  by  the  common  confent  of  the  whole  Nation  in 
Parliaments  as  other  Laws  of  the  Nation  are  t  ] 

jinfw.  Whether,  {How  comes  it  ?/]  Speak  of  the  efficient  caufe,  or 
the  formal,  or  what,  it's  hard  to  knov/,  fo  lingular  are  his  Logical 
notions.    But  the  firft  is  moft  likely.  4 

And  then,  1.  The  queftion  is  ftill  unanfwered,  What  is  the  One 
common  Governing  power  in  the  Church  which  this  Parliament  confent  hath 
fa  up  f   He  knows  this  is  the  queftion. 

2.  And  if  it  be  bf~  Parliament  confent)  how  old  is  your  Church? 
What  Parliament  firft  made  it?  It's  not  fo  old  as  Luther  r  Is  it  no 
older  than  the  Liturgy  or  Canons  ? 

j.  Doth  it  die  and  live  again  as  oft  as  Parliaments  change  it? 
If  the  corruption  of  one  have  been  the  generation  of  another,  how 
many  Churches  01  England  have  you  had  ? 

4.  The  whole  Nation  did  not  confent  by  Parliament  when  the 
Lords  and  Commons  voted  down  the  Bilhops  and  Liturgy:  was  there 
then  no  "National  Church  ? 

5.  How  fhail  we  prove  that  the  whole  or  half  the  Nation  ever 
meant  to  put  their  confent  into  the  hand  of  the  Parliament  to  make  a  . 
new  Church  of  England,  and  to  alter  it  ? 

6.  What  men  make  they  "may  deftroy.  May  not  the  Nation  with- 
draw fuch  confent?  and  the  Parliament  unmake  their  creature? 

§.  7.  -Next,  p.  IOO  he  faith  {The  Reprefentative  Church  0/ England 
isthe  Bi{Ijo?j  and.  Presbyters' of  this  Church  meeting  according  to  the  Laws 

tftfe  Realm,   to  confult   and  advife  about  matters  of  Religion. The 

confent  of  both  Convocations  (of  Canterbury  and  Tork,  Provinces,)  is  the 
fcprefentative  National  Church  of  England. 

Anfw-  i.  So  here  we  have  a  D' ft u five-  Church  and  its  Reprefcnta- 
Uftc,  but  no  Government  of  either,  as  a  Church,  mentioned,  but 

the  Civil. 

2.  And  they  can  be  no  Governors  meerly   as  Reprefenting  thofe 
that  are  no  Govsmours  themfelves.     Not  as  the  peoples  Reprejentatives;  , 
for  they  are  no  Church  Govsmours  (whatever  elfewhere  he  faith  like 

z  Brown- 


(H7) 

a  Brownifl  of  the  Keys  being  given  to  Peter  as  reprefenting  the  whole 
Church  J  Not  as  the  Presbyters  reprefentatives ;  For,  i.  They  are 
denied  Epifcopal  power,  2.  And  they  are  Governours  at  molt  but 
of  their  particular  Churches,  and  not  of  the  whole.  3.  Not  as  the 
Bilhops  reprefentatives,  for  1.  They  are  there  themfelves,  2.  And 
they  are  no  Common  Governours  of  the  whole  as  fuch. 

y  If  he  mean  that  the  two  Convocations  when  they  confect  be- 
come the  One  Common  Confticutive  Governing  Power  of  the  Na- 
tional ChurcH,  this  is  intelligible,  but  1.  He  after  denieth  any  fuch  \ 
2.  And  then  their  d-iflent  would  d.flblve  the  Church,  and  one  Con- 
vocation not  oblige  it  '>,  (wich  much  more  fuch. J 

5.  8.  But  yet  he  perceivethhe  hath  notanfwered  me,  and  there- 
fore comes  to  it,  page  JOO,  faying,   [It's  a  falfe  f up p  oft  ti on  that  where 
rver   there  is  the  true  notion   of  a  Church,  there  mitft  be  a  Conflitutive 

Regent  part,  . ■ — -  a  ft  an  ding  Governing  power    rvb.cb    is    an  ejfential 

partofit.2  x 

Anfvp.  A  trne  notion,  belongeth  to  equivocals  ;  The  true  notion^  and 
the  proper  political  notion  are  words  of  various  ffgniiication.  I 
have  granted  you  that  the  true  notion  of  a  Church  belongs  to  a 
Ship-full,  a  Prifon  full,  a  Houfe-full,  of  Chriftians  as  fuch;  and  to 
our  Parliament,  and  to  the  Common-Council  of  the  City :  But  not 
the  notion  now  in  queftion. 

2.  Is  not  Government  eflential  to  a  Governed  Church  ?  Fixed 
Government  to  a  fixed  Church,  and  tranfient  temporary  Govern- 
ment to  an  anf>verable  Church?  Deny  this  and  few  will  follow 
you. 

§.  0.  He  adds,  [(<  Which  I  will  prove  to  be  falfe  from  Mr.  B. 
*  himfelf.  He  ailerts  that  there  is  one  Catholick  vifible  Church, 
u  and  that  all  particular  Churches  headed  by  their  particular  Bi- 
u  fhops  or  Pallors,  are  parts  of  the  Univerfal  Church  as  a  Troop  is  of 

ct  an  Array,  and  a  City  of  a  Kingdom. -Then  it  will  unavoidably 

u  follow,  that  -there  mull  be  a  Catholick  vifible  Head  to  a  Catho- 
u  lick  vifible  Church.    And  fo  Mr.  Bs.  Conftitutive  Regent  part  of 

"a  Church  hath  done  the  Pops  a  wonderful  kindnefs But  there 

$  are  fome  men  in  the  world  that  do  not  attend  the  advantages 
<!  they  give  to  Popery>  fo  they  may  but  vent  their  fpleen  againft 
ct  the  Church  of  England.  But  doth  not  Mr.  B.  fay,  that  the  Uni- 
4t  verfai  Church  is  headed  by  Chrift  5  I  grant  be  doth ;  But  the 
"Queftion  is  of  the  Vifible  Church  of  which  particular  Churches 

"are 


("8) 

u  are  parts :  And  they  being  Vifible  parte,  require  a  Vifible  Con- 

*l  ftitutive  Regent  Head, therefore  the  whole  Vifible  Church 

41  mult  have  likewife  a  Conftitutive  Vifible  Regent  part  —  This  is  to 
*'  make  a  Key  for  Catholicks  ? 

Anfw.  I  am  glad  he  fpeaketh  fo  intelligibly,  in  denying  a  Confti- 
tntive  Regent  fart  ^  though  forry  that  he  fpeaks  fo  ill. 

i.  When  I  have  written  againft  Johnfon,  alias  Terr*  the  Papift, 
two  Books  on  this  fubject  •,  efpeciaJly  the  later  fully  proving  the 
Catholick  Church  headed  by  Chrift,  to  be  that  vifible  Church  Ca- 
tholick  of  which  all  particulars  are  members  *,  Can  the  Reader 
think  I  fhould  write  it  over  again,  becaufe  this  Do&or  will  talk 
over  a  little  of  the  fame  with  that  Prieft,  and  take  no  notice  of  my 
proof  or  anfwer  ? 

2.  Doth  he  believe  that  the  Kingdoms  of  the  World  are  not  vi- 
fible parts  of  God's  Univerfal  Kingdom?  and  yet  Godinvifibie? 

3.  Dare  he  fay  that  all  true  Churches  are  not  real  parts  of  ChrifiVs 
Univerfal  Church,  as  a  Governed  bcdy  ?  and  yet  are  not  they  vifible  ? 
Is  it  necelTary  then  that  the  Univerfal  Head  nuift  be  vifible  if  the 
fubordinate  be  fo  ? 

4.  Doth  he  not  perceive  that  he  turneth  the  Controverfie,  from 
the  necejfity  of  a  Regent  bead,  to  the  neceility  of  his  vifibility  ?  As  if 
our  queltion  had  not  been,  Which  is  the  Regent  yart  of  the  Church  of 
England  ?  but  whether  it  muft  he  vifible  f  Is  this  edifying  I 

5.  All  Chriftians  are  agreed  that  the  Univerfal  Church  is  Vifible. 
1.  In  its  parts  and  members  on  earth,  and  their  profefiion.  2.  In 
that  Chrift  the  Head  was  vifible  on  earth  •,  ;.  And  hath  left  Vifible 
Univerfal  Laws}  4.  And  hath  a  Body  vifible  in  Heaven ^  as  the 
King  is  to  his  Courtiers  but  not  to  molt  of  his  Subjects  •,  5.  And 
will  fhortly  vifibly  judge  all  the  World.  Thus  far  and  no  further 
(fave  as  feen  extraordinarily  to  7W,  Stephen,  &c)  is  the  Uni- 
verfal Head  Vifible.  And  are  we  not  agreed  that  this  is  a  real  and 
mod  excellent  Political  Church?  and  that  all  other  Vifible  Churches 
are  parts  of  it?  Something  befides  fpleen  makes  fomemen  talkdan- 
geroufiy. 

§.  10.  But  really  doth  he  think  that  this  doth  unavoidably  fet 
up  the  Pope  ?  Why,  firft  is  there  a  word  of  this  thatafoberChri- 
ftian  dare  deny  ?  or  that  the  Chriftian  World  doth  not  common- 
ly confent  to  ?  And  do  the  certain  Dodrines  of  the  Gofpel  and 
Church  fet  up  the  Pope?   Will  he  turn  Papift  if  this  be  proved, 

and 


(  i'9) 

and  the  Chriftian  World  be  not  deceived  ?  Is  this  our  Champion 
againft  Popery  now  ?  I  thought  no  man  but  Mr.  Cheny  and  fome 
odd  Papifts  had  been  of  this  Opinion?  But  to  Mr.  Cheny  and  a- 
gainft  Johnfon  I  have  confuted  it,  and  therefore  thither  refer  the 
Reader.  Far  be  it  from  me  to  refift  Popery  by  denying,  i.  That 
ChriftY  Church  thus  far  vifible  is  one  Political  body  headed  by 
himfelf,  2.  Or  that  all  true  viftble  Churches  are  parts  of  it.  j.  Or 
that  every  Political  Governed  body  is  conftituted  of  the  Regent  and 
fnbdite  farts.  Chriftians  will  reject  me  for  the  former,  and  Politici- 
ans deride  me  if  I  hold  the  laft. 

§.   11.   He  proceeded!,  [«*  2.  The  plain  refolution  is,    that  we 
lt  deny  any  neceffity  of  any  fuch  Regent  Conftitutive  part,  or  one 
u  formal  Eeclefraftical  Head  as  eflential  to  a  National  Church  :  For  a-. 
<l  National  confent  is  as  fufficient  to  make  a  National  Church  as  an 
"  Univerfal  confent  to  make  a  Catholick.] 

Anfw.  No  confent  maketh  a  Catholick  Church,  but  confenting.to 
one  fupremeHead,  Chrift  •  But  I  am  glad  1  underftand  you. 

§  12.  Saith  he,  [  u  Qjeft.  By  what  way  this  National  confent 
"is  to  be  declared  ?  By  the  Constitutions  of  this  Church  theArch- 
^Bifhops,  Bifliops  and  Presbyters  fummoned  by  the  King's  Writ, 
4tare  to  advife  and  declare  their  judgments  in  matters  of  Religion, 
*'  which  received  and  enafted  by  Parliament  there  is  as  great  a  Na- 
tc  tionai  confent  as  to  any  Law.  .  And  all  theBifhops,  Minilters  and 
"  People  make  up  this  National  Church.^ 

jinfip.  Now  we  are  come  to  the  bottom:  And,  1.  Our  queftion 
is  of  the  Conftitution  of  the  Church,  and  ths  Do&or  tells  us  the 
Adminiftration  makes  it.  To  confult  and  advife  and  make  Laws  are 
2(fls  of  Adminiftration,  and  follow  the  Conftitution.  Men  muft  have 
Tower  before  they  #/<?*>,  and  mult  be  a  Church  before  they  aft  as  a 
Church. 

2  Yea  to  Advife  and  Confult  are  not  fo  much  as  atts  proper  to 
adminiftring  Government,  but  belong  to  thofe  that  are  no  Go- 
vernours*  alfo. 

3.  If  they  be  no  Laws  till  the  Parliament  make  them  fuch,  then 
either  the  Parliament  are  your  Church  Hiad,  or  you  have  none  that's 
Ecclefiaftical. 

But  having  your  plain  Confeflion  that  yon  have  no  fuch  Regent 
fart ,  and  fo  are  no  Church  Political,  (fave  Civil )  but  a  meer  Aflbcia- 
tion>  I  ask. 


(  1.20  ) 

§.  1 3.  i.  Why  do  you  pretend  that  we  are  none  of  the  Church  of 
England,  or  that  we  vent  our  fpleen  againft  it  or  deny  it,  who 
deny  not  AfTociated  Churches  in  England  under  one  Civil  Govern- 
ment) 

2.  How  unhappily  are  the  Church-Defenders  and  Conformifts 
difagreed?  Read  Mr.  Dodwefl  and  many  fuch  others  that  take  the 
Church  to  be  a  Governed  body  Politick^  and  fee  what  they  will  judg 
of  you  ? 

3.  Are  not  you  and  I  liker  to  be  of  one  Church  of  England^ 
who  agree  what  it  is,  than  you  and  thofe  Bifoops  and  Do&ors  that 
fpeak  of  two  different  things,  and  agree  not  io  much  as  what 
it  is  ? 

4.  Have  you  not  brought  your  Defence  of  the  Church  of  England 
to  a  fair  iflue,  by  denying  that  there  is  any  fuch  Church ,  in  the 
queftioned  political  fenfe  f 

5.  What  made  you  before  talk  of  being  under  one  Government? 
If  you  meant  only  Civil?  Is  your  Governed  Church  as  fuch  only 
Civil,  or  a  Kingdom  only  ? 

6.  Do  you  not  now  abfolve  all  men  from  the  duty  of  obeying  the 
Church  of  England  as  fitch,  and  from  all  guilt  of  difobeying  them? 
How  can  men  Govern  that  are  no  Governours  ?  and  bow  can  we 
obey  them/  It's  only  the  Civil  power  then  that  we  herein  dit 
obey. 

'  If  you  fay  that  all  the  Biihops  are  Governours,  and  altogether 
govern  the  whole ",  I  anfwer,  Yes  per  panes,  but  not  as  a  whole 
or  Church,  If  twenty  Families  in  a  Village  agree  as  Matters  .and- 
Servants,  to  go  one  way  as  Confenters ,  this  maketh  no  one  Go- 
vernment of  the  Village.  If  the  Phyficians  of  London  confent  to 
one  Pharmacopeia  that  maketh  them  not  a  body  Politick.  If  twen- 
ty Sea  Captains  confent  to  go  one  Voyage  by  one  rule,  each  one 
is  a  Governour  of  his  own  Ship,  but  this  maketh  no  Government 
of  the  whole.  All  the  jufcices  and  Mayors*  of  England  rule  the 
Kingdom  per  partes^  by  the  fame  Law  :  But  all  together  make  not 
one  Ariftocracy  to  Govern  the  Kingdom  as  One  whole.  Unlefs 
your  Bifhops,  cVc  are  United  in  One  perfona  Politica  or  Ariftocra- 
cy, they  may  rule  their  feveral  Churches,  but  they  make  not  one 
common  Government  for  the  National  Church  as  fuch.  An  agree- 
ment of  the  Emperouf,  Spaniard,  and  other  Confederates  make  not 
one  Kingdom  or  body  Politick. 

7.  How 


(    121    ) 

7.  How  can  they  be  Schifmaticks  for  difobeying  them  that  are 
not  their  Governours. 

8.  How  come  Diflenters  bound  by  Parliament  confent  f  If  it  ne- 
ver was  in  their  minds  to  truft  them  as  Conienters tor  them?  yea 
and  declare  their  own  diffent,  as  mod  of  the  Nation  did  lately  a- 
gainfl  Prelacy  and  Liturgy,  yea  and  their  chofen  reprefentatives  ? 
Have  fuch  reprefentatives  more  power  to  exprefs  our  confent  than 
we  our  lelves? 

9.  You  unhappily  erre  with  Hooker  in  your  popular  Politicks, 
if  you  think  that  the  Laws  bind  us  only  becaufe  we  confent  to 
them  by  our  Reprefentatives,  or  that  as  fuch  they  make  them. 
Whereas  it  is  as  by  C wanting  in  the  Conftitntion  they  are  made  part 
of  the  Rulers  or  Legislators,  and  not  meerly  as  if  we  made  the  Laves 
by  them. 

10.  And  as  to  Convocation  confent,  how  binds  it  all  thofethat 
never  confented  to  them  ?  How  is  the  City  of  London  fo  bound  to 
Conform,  when  they  had  not  one  chofen  Clerk  ( but  only  the  Dig- 
nitaries,) in  the  Convocation  that  made  us  our  Conformity  (the 
two  chofen  by  them  being  refuted  by  the  Bifhops.) 

11.  Will  not  you  pafs  for  an  aflerter  of  the  Principles  of  In- 
dependency, that  not  only  fay,  The  Keys  are  given  to  the  whole 
body ,  and  the  Convocation  reprefent  the  People,  &c.  but  alfo 
that  England  is  one  Church  but  by  confent,  without  confenting to 
any  one  Conftitutive  Regent  Church  head.  The  Indefendants  are  for 
a  National  Church  meerly  by  confederacy  and  confent,  without 
National  Government  of  it. 

12.  You  go  further  from  the  Epifcopal  Politicks  than  the  Pref- 
byterians  do :  For  they  make  an  jiriftocratical  Regent  Part,  but  you 
make  none. 

1 3.  I  doubt  fome  Statefmen  will  be  angry  with  you,  that  fay 
there  is  no  power  of  Church  Government  in  England,  but  from 
the  King  as  Head  (as  Crumpton  before  Coufws  Tables,  and  others 
ordinarily.) 

14.  Do  you  make  England  in  eflentials  any  more  one  Church, 
than  England  and  any  Foreigners  agreeing  are  one  ?  Did  the  Sy- 
nod of  Dort  make  us  one  with  them  ?  Do  large  Councils  make 
many  Nations  one  Church  ?  Did  the  Heptarchy  make  England  one 
Kingdom,  when  feven  Kings  Governed  the  whole  byp4rtt,  but  none 
the  whole,  as  fuch? 

R  is   I 


(  122   ) 

15.  I  befeech  you  think  what  you  have  done  againfl  the  Pare- 
chiaiy  Diocefane  and  Provincial  Churches  in  England.  Have  none  of 
thefe,  have  not  each  of  thefe  a  Regent  Confi it utive  part?  Are  none 
of  them  true  Churches  in  fenfu  politico  ?  You  dare  not  fay,  No. 
If  they  are,  You  have  faid  that  vifible  Churches  as  Parts  unavoidably 
require  a  vifible  Head  to  the  whole  (by  which  I  bring  in  the  Pope, 
becaufe  you  think  Chrift  will  not  ferve  tl^e  turn:)  And  do  you 
not  fay  that  all  thefe  Churches  are  parts  of  the .  Church  of  Eng- 
land f  And  if  you  deny  it  to  have  one  Regent  part,  do  \ou  not  then 
either  deftroy  the  reft,  or  ufe  the  name  Church  equivocally  to  thefe 
feveral  forts  fo  heterogeneal? 

16.  I  pray  you  tell  us,  from  whom  our  Arch-bifhops  receive  their 
power  ?  If  you  fay  from  the  Bifhops,  and  fo  Inferiours  or  Equals 
may  give  power,  why  may  not  Presbyters  make  Presbyters  or  Bi- 
fhops, and  generare  fpeciem  ?  If  it  mult  come  from  Superiours,  the 
Church  of  England  hath  none  fuch. 

17.  If  the  Peoples  confent  can  make  a  National  Church,  why 
may  it  not  make  an  Independant  or  Presbyterian  Church  ? 

18.  If  the  Nations  confent,  as  fuch  make  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, it  is  not  made  by  Legillative  power  of  King  and  Parlia- 
ment. 

19.  Do  the  Clergy  reprefent  the  King?  or  is  h-e  none  of  the 
Church  ? 

20.  How  prove  you  that  the  Clergy  reprefent  the  Laity  in  the 
Convocation  ? 

21.  By  your  Rule,  if  divers  parties  of  Chriftians  agree  to  fet  up 
divers  forms  of  Church-Government,  with  mutual  forbearance  they 
would  be  one  National  Church.  And  fo  would  Epifcopal,  Presby- 
terians and  Independants  if  the  Law  allowed  them  all. 

22.  Was  the  Church  of  England  the  fame  thing  in  the  days  of 
//.  8.  Ed.  6.  ££.  Mary,  Q  Eliz..  &c. 

2$.  Who  maketh  National  churches  in  abfolute  Hereditary  Mo- 
narchies, where  are  no  Parliaments  to  fignifie  popular  confent  ? 

24.  If  every  Law  of  Order  be  effential  to  your  Church,  few  Con- 
formifts  are  of  it:  If  only  the  true  eflentials,  why  are  not  wealfo 
of  it? 

25.  How  ill  agree  you  with  Mr.  Cheny,  who  maketh  it  Atheifm, 
Infidelity,  Blafphemy,  Impiety,  to  aflert  Church-making  confent  or 
confederacies  befides  Baptifra  ? 

26.  But 


(  l*3  ) 

16.  Butthebeft  is  you  leave  us  in  hope  of  Reformation  •,  for  if 
Parliaments  will  but  confent  for  us  to  take  down  Diocefanes  low- 
er, and  to  reform  Parilh-Churches,  and  alter  Liturgy,  &c  we  are 
the  National  Church  ftill.  And  one  prevailing  Vote  may  prove  us  all 
confenters;  and  make  the  Church  quite  another  thing. 

§.  14.  Yet  he  faith  [Page  299.  By  this  defcription  any  one  nuy  fee 
how  eafily  ths  Church  of  England  /'/  djhnguified  from  the  Ptpifts  on  one 
fide,  an'dthe  Diffenters  on  the  other. ~] 

j4nf\v.  I  am-  one,  and  I  cannot  fee  it,  nor  fo  much  as  fee  how  to 
know  the  Church  it  felf,  nor  who  is  a  Member  of  it,  nor  how  any 
man  can  know  it:  but  he  feems  to  me  to  make  it  a  Church  wvlfible. 
But  I  fee  the  DifTenters  mud  be  none  of  it. 

1.  How  was  the  Church  of  England  known  from  Papifts,  in 
the  beginning  of  H.3.  or  in  the  middle,  or  in  the  end?  orhow  known 
when  it  began  ? 

How  was  it  known  in  the  beginning  of  Qj,een  Elizabeths  days* 
when  the  Papifis  came  to  Church  *  or  now  as  to  Church-Papifts  f  Jiow 
[hall  we  know  to  which  Church  the  late  Bifhop  Bramhall  and  other 
Doftors  belong,  who  would  have  the  Pope  Govern  us  according 
to  the  Canons  as  Patriarch  of  the  Weft,  &  principium  unitatatis  urn- 
verfalis,  and  all  go  for  Schifmaticks  that  deny  it.  Some  call  this 
the  New-Church  of  England,  differing  from  the  old  one  which  was 
before  Bifhop  Laud. 

2.  How  fhall  one  know  how  far  confent  is  neceflary  to  a  Mem- 
ber, and  diflent  unchurcheth  him  ?  Lately  a  Doctor  was  accufed  for 
faying  he  fcrupled  to  call  the  King  according  to  the  Liturgy,  Our 
rnoft  Religious  King:  Mr.  Jole  of  Sarralwzs  fufpended  for  notoftner 
wearing  the  Surplice,  and  denying  to  pray  in  the  Litany  for  [Our 
moft  Gracious  Queen  Katherine,  and  James  Duke  of  York.  But  thefe 
are  fmall  difTents  •,  The  fenfe  is  the  Churches  Law  and  Doctrine, 
and  not  the  found  of  words  in  various  fenfes:  I  have  ofc  fhewed  in 
how  many  contrary  fenfes  the  Conformifls  take  the  39  Articles,  the 
Liturgy,  the  words  of  Subfcription  and  Declaration,  and  the  Oaths 
impofed  ?  How  (hall  one  know  among  all  thefe,  who  are,  or  are  not  of 
your  Church  ?  When  you  tell  us  that  it  is  Agreeing  in  the  Faith  govern- 
ment and  Worfhip  which  is  eftabliflied  by  Law"]  and  then  fpeak  fo  hot- 
ly againft  the  need  and  being  of  any  common  Government,  favethe 
Civil,  at  all  eftabliflied  over  the  Church  as  a  National  vody,  and  ne- 
ver diftinguifn  any  neceflary  parts  of  Faith,  Government  and  Worfhip, 

R  2  from 


from  the  reft,  nor  tell  us  how  to  know  them?  And  when  Conformilts  * 
diffent  in  fo  many  things*,  Tome  from  Lay  Chancellours  Govern- 
ment by  the  Keys,  fome  in  the  fenfe  of  the  Articles,  and  theNon- 
conformifts  fay  they  confent  to  all  that  Scripture  requireth,  and  the 
meer  Circumftantials  determined  by  Law,  how  (hall  you  be  known? 
Either  it  is  in  the  Effentials  only,  or  the  Integrals  alfo,  or  alfo  in 
all  the  Laws  de  Accedentibus,  that,  the  Church  of  England  by  agree- 
ment is  made  that  One  Church. 

i.  If  it  be  only  in  Effentials^  is  there  either  Confeflion,  Rubrick, 
Canon,  or  any  Writer  that  hath  told  us  which  be  thofe,  and  all 
thofc,  and  only  thofe  Effentials?  I  never  met  with  man  that  pre- 
tendeth  to  know  them,  and  therefore  never  met  with  mm  that  can 
thus  tell,  whether  he  be  of  the  Church  of  England  or  not  ?  nor  that 
can  tell  of  others,  and  who  is  not  ? 

2..  To  fay  it  muft  b&-confent  alfo  in  the  Integrals  that  is  neceffa- 
ry  ad  effe,  is  a  contradiction :  and  is  to  make  Integrals  Effentials. 
To  fay  that  it  muft  be  confent  in  all  Laws  of  Occidents  alfo,  is  to 
make  that  an  effential  part. which  is  no  part.  Our  loofe  confound- 
ing Difputers,  when  they  have  loft  the  truth  in  fuch  contradictions, 
may  fay  as  Mr.  Dodmll  doth  to  me,  that  I  Cavil  .•  But  will  that  an- 
fwer  help  down  all  abfurdities  with  reafonable  men  ?  it's  plain  that 
as  the  Papifts  Doftrine  of  defining  Church-Members  and  Chriftians, 
by  no  Effential  Articles  of  Faith,  but  by  Probable  Propofal  of  more  or 
lefs  doth  make  their  Church  invifible,  fo  doth  this  definition  of  the 
Church  of  England  by  Do^or  StUUngfleet  make  theirs,  and  leave  us 
uncertain  who  is  of  it.  It  makes  me  think  what  I  heat  Oliver  the  U- 
furper  laid  to  a  Biftiop  that  now  is  (as  1  am  credibly  told,  iDoclor 
b<m  i<now  you  that -yon  are  a  true  Minifies  of  Chriftf}  who  anfwercd 
him  on  Mr.  Dodwell's  Principles,  \_Becaufe  I  have  received  Ordination 
by.  uninterrupted  fucceffive  conveyance  from  true  Bijhops,  from  the  Apo- 
ftl'es  :  2  Saith  he  •,  Are  you  jure  they  were  all  true  Bifhops  and  the  fuc- 
ceffion  uninterrupted  ?  Dotlor  will  you  take  your  Oath  that  you  are  thus  a 
true  Minift erf}  At  which  when  he  ftuck,  [Come y  come ,  Doclor,  faith 
he.,   there  is  a  furer  and  a  nearer  way.} 

Certain  I  am,  that  if  Agreement  in  the  fenfe  of  the  39  Articles, 
or  in  all  Forms  and  Ceremonies  be  neceffary  to  conftitute  a  Member 
©f  the  Church  of  England,  abundance  that  fubferibe  are  none,  that 
now  go  for  fuch  ;  But  if  not,  I  pray  tell  us  why  fuch  as  I  alfo  are 
apt  Members,  of . your.  Church.    Do  I  more  differ  from  you  than 

Doftor 


C  1 25-) 

Doctor  Heylin,  Mr.  Thorndiky  Mr.  Dodwell,  and  in  a  word  than  the 
party  which  adhered  to  Arch-biihop  Laud,  differed  from  the  puty 
which  adhered  to  Bifhop  Abbot,  Whitgift,  and  the  Parliaments  of 
thofe  and  after-times  ?  If  the  Church  of  England  as  fuch  a  one,  be 
conftituted  by  no  fupreme  Church-Government,  we  arc  all  of  it,  fo 
far  as  we  confent  to  the  Aflbciation,  and  none  as  it  is  one  Political 
body.  And  what  then  becomes  of  its  Laws,  and  all  theTreatifesof 
its  Church-Policy  ? 

§.  15.  Butyct  the  Doctor  flops  not  here  :  J  unavoidably  irtroduce 
Popery  if  I  make.  <*  Conftttutive  Regent  Church  power,  neceffary  to  a  Church  : 
for  then  the  Vmverfai  Church  mufthave  fuch.~\ 

Arfw-  1.  it's  not  necefTary  to  an  equivocal  ungoverned  Church, 
fuch  as  our  Worcefierjhire  Aflbciatioa  made  :  But  to  a  Political  Go- 
verned Church  it  is. 

2.  Mark  here  all  you  that  go  the  Political  Church  way,  that  your 
Doctor  accufeth  you  more  than  the  Nonconformifts,  even  of  certain 
opening  the  door  to  Popery,  What  if  1  had  faid  lb  by  you?  Is  it 
fuch  men  that  thus  make  you  agents  for  a  Pope  ? 

$.  Doth  this  Political  defcription  of  Parochial,  Diocefane,  Pro- 
vincial, Patriarchal  Churches,  aifo  bring  in  Popery  ? 

4.  Then  either  our  Archbifhops  have  no  power,  or  they  have  it 
from  no  fuperiour,  or  elfe  they  infer  a  Pope. 

5.  I  again  tell  the  Doctor  as  I  did  Mr>  Cheny  y  It  is  difingenious  to 
fay  this  to  me,  when  I  have  written  fo  much  againft  Johnfon  the 
Prieft,  in  my  firft,  and  fpecially  my  fecond  anfwer,  which  none  re- 
plyethto,  without  any  confutation  or  notice  of  it:  1  have  fully  pro-, 
vcd  that  Chrift's  Catholick  Church  hath  himfelf  for  an  EfTential  Head, 
fometime  vifible  on  earth,  leaving  vifible  Laws,  and  now  vifible  to 
the  Courtiers  in  Heaven,  and  coming  vifibly  to  judge  all  ^  and  there 
is  no  other.  Indeed  if  the  doctrine  of  Mr.  Dodwefl  vnd  many  fuch 
hold,  who  deny  that  the  power  floweth  immediately  from  Chrifts 
Law  or  Charter  to  the  Church,  and  not  from  the  Ordainersor  E- 
lectors,  who  do  but  determine  of  the  Receiver  and  Inveft  him,  then 
all  the  Doctors  in  England  cannot  anfwer  the  Digreffion,  Cap.  14. 
of  the  Book  called  [The  Catholic^  Hierarchy, 1  proving  that  fuch  a 
Prelatical  fubordination  of  Churches,  inferreth  a  Pope  :  But  1  have 
fully  (hewed  the  vanity  of  that  inference  as  to  us. 

But  remember  that  the  Doctor  and  1  are  agreed,  that  [A-Nati- 
en  cwfeming  in  an  Affociation  of  particular  Churches,  may  be  called 

aNa- 


C        ) 

a  National  Church  (equivocally ,)  Though  it  can  make  no  Laws  un- 
lefs  its  confent  alfo  fet  up  a  Supreme  Church-Government.  Meer 
Agreementsare  not  Laws. 

§.  16.  He  next  would  make  the  unwary  Reader  think  that  hean- 
fwereth  my  Queftion,    1.  What  is  the  fame  'Rule  that  all  mufl  vpalk^by, 

viz.  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  Foundation  of  our  Faith*  — 2.  But 

our  Church  requireth  Conformity  to  the  Rules  anointed  by  it  agreable  to 
the  word  of  God*"} 

Anfw.  But  it  feems  the  Scripture  then  is  not  the  whole  rule,  but 
part:  the  fundamental  part.  2.  Which  did  Foul  mean?  Was  your 
Churches  Rule  then  made  ?  3.  Doth  your  Church  require  this  ad  ejfe, 
or  but  ad  melim  efje  f  If  the  firft,  all  Canon-breakers  are  difmem- 
bred  ?  And,  is  that  according  to  God's  word  ?  If  the  later,  why 
am  not  I  of  your  Church?  4.  But  how  comes  that  Church  to  command 
and  bind,  which  hath  no  fuch  Ruling  power  ? 


CHAP. 


(  i%6  ) 

CHAP.    DC 

Of  the   Peoples  Consent   to  the  P after al  and  Church- 
Relation. 


$•   !■  T)Age  307.  Saith  the  Dean,    C  ltTrw  next  thing  to  be  con- 

JL     w  fidered  is  the  intereft  and  power  of  the  People  as  to 

t£  the  choice  of  their  Pallors,  for  want  of  which  great  complaints 

Ct  are  made, Mr.  Baxter  is  very  tragical  on  this  Argument, 

ct  and  keepeth  not  within  tolerable  bounds  of  difcretion  in  plead- 
c<  ing  the  Peoples  Caufe  againft  Magiflrates  and  Patrons  and 
Ci  Laws.] 

J?jf\v.  1.  That  is  tolerable  to  fome  men,  which  others  cannot 
bear  *,  Silken  ears  mull  have  foft  words ;  The  Land  cannot  bear  all 
his  words,  was  an  old  Complaint :  And  [  Speaks  pleafing  things,  Pro- 
phecy deceit]  was  an  old  Mandate-  It's  no  wonder  if  that  fort  of 
meD,  that  mult  judg  whether  our  Preaching,  and  Woiihipping  God 
be  tolerable,  and  muft  write  us  down  the  words  which  we  mult 
fay  to  God  in  Prayer,  or  not  be  tolerated,  do  alfo  think  themfelves 
the  meet  judges,  whether  our  indifcretion  be  h.tollerabk. 

2.  But  let  us  try  whether  he  (tate  this  Controverfie  any  more  Lo- 
gically or  truly  than  the  reft,  and  whether  he  intimate  not  hurt- 
ful though  tollerable  untruth. 

1.  It's  a  crooked  infmuation,  to  put  the  wcrd  [Power"]  inflesd 
of  [Right  and  Liberty,]  us  if  [Power]  of  Conferring  in  the  People, 
and  [Power  of  Rulers]  were  univocal  and  not  equivocal  terms:  But 
this  is  tolerable.-  For  experience  hath  convinced  me,  how  little  Lc~ 
gical  ftriftnefs  is  from  this  Doctor  to  be  expected :  1  doubt  left 
next,  as  fome  men  inftead  of  Learning  maintain  their  reputation 
by  deriding  it,  we  may  expect  fome  fuch  defence  of  the  Doctors 
Logick,  to  prove  that  he  is  none  of  the  Difoutcrs  of  this  World,  who 
deceive  men  by  vain  Pkilofephy. 

2.  And  the  word  [choice]  inftead  of  [confer:]  is  fomewhat 
more  crooked ;  For  [choice]  ufually  includeth  the  firft  nominating 

Vote  j 


C       ) 

Vote;  Andheknoweth  that  I  pleaded  for  the  neceffityofnomore, 
than  the  Churches  confent,  though  it  were  fubfequent  to  the  choice 
of  Magiftrates  or  Patrons. 

3.  But  the  next  is  worfe,  that  \_I plead  the  Peoples  Caufe  againft 
Magiftrates^  Patrons  and  Laws^\  when  I  do  but  defire  their  Con- 
jun&ion. 

§•  2.  His  repetitions  call  me  tedioufly  to  repeat  the  ftate  of  the 
Controverfie  (abufinefs  quite  below  him.) 

I.  I  Have  oft  faid,  that  God  hath  not  made  either  Magifirates  or 
People  the  Judges  who  is  fit  to  be,  and  (hall  be  a  Minifter  of  Chrift 
in  general -?  but  the  ORDAINERS  and  the  PERSON  himfelf  con- 
junct. This  is  evident,  i.  From  Scripture  Inftancesof  all  that  were 
Ordained  :  2.  From  the  nature  of  the  thing. 

1.  Who  isfuppofed  fo  fit  to  judge  as  men  and  Seniors  of  the 
fame  Office?  Who  but  Phyficians  are  fit  to  judge  who  is  meet  to  be 
a  Licenfcd  Phyfician?  And  who  but  Philofophers  judge  of  Graduates 
and  Profeflburs  in  Philofophy  ? 

%  And  no  man  can  make  me  a  Minifter  againft  my  will,  nor 
know  me  to  be  fit,  if  I  know  my  felf  to  be  unfit. 

§.  3.  II.  I  have  oft  faid  that  the  Supreme  Civil  Governour  is  the 
Judge,  whom  he  muft  countenance,  maintain  and  tolerate.  The  proof 
is  eafie,  1.  Becaufe  to  doit  is  his  work;  and  every  man  muft  be  a 
difcerning  judge  of  his  own  work.  2.  Becaufe  it  is  a  publick  a&  of 
Government,  and  he  is  the  chief  publick  Judge  therein. 

§.  4.  III.  I  have  oft  faid  that  the  Difpofal  of  the  Tythes  and 
Temples  is  in  the  power  of  the  Prince,  and  Patron  by  his  grant.  But 
with  thefe  bounds. 

1.  His  power  is  not  Abfolntc,  but  Vnder  Chrift  and  limited  by  him, 
and  therefore  he  hath  no  power  againft  him,  nor  to  crofs  his  Laws  or 
to  contraditt  his  ends. 

2.  If  the  Tythes  and  Temples  were  given  only  for  publick  Teach- 
ers of  Catechumens,  or  for  meer  Lecturers,  the  Magiftrate  muft  dif- 
pofe  ofthemtofuch  as  are  capable  of  that  Office. 

3.  If  the  Tythes  and  Temples  were  given  for  the  Paftors  of  the  Chur- 
ches, the  Magiftrate  is  bound  to  give  them  to  fuch  as  are  lawfully  cal- 
led to  be  fuch  Paftors,  and  not  by  the  advantage  of  his  Truft,  over- 
throw the  way  of  entrance  inftituted  by  Chrift. 

4.  How- 


(  I27  ) 

4.  However  if  they  Were  devoted  to  God,  it  is  God  who  is  the  pro- 
prietor, and  it's  facrilege  to  alienate  them.  And  an  intolerable  ill 
difpofal  is  alienation. 

§.  5.  IV.  I  have  oft  faid,  that  it  being  fuppofed  that  their  An- 
ceftorsgift  of  Tythes  or  Glebe  and  Temples  is  the  reafon  of  our 
common  Patronage  and  prefenting  power,  the  will  of  the  dead  Do 
nors  is  to  be  obferved,  and  their  gifts  given  to  none  but  on  the 
termes  by  them  determined.*  But  their  gifts  are  fuppofed  to  be 
for  the  Churches  good  and  not  againft  it :  Nor  had  they  any  pow- 
er on  pretenfe  of  beneficence,  to  deftroy,  or  to  take  away  more 
than  they  give :  But  the  Trufting  of  our  Souls  Conduft  is  a  mat- 
ter of  more  weight  than  Tythes  and  Temples.  If  Tythes  be  pro- 
ved  not  to  be  of  Divine  Right,  all  that  can  be  expeftedis,  that 
if  the  flock  cannot  trufl:  him  whom  the  Patron  chufeth  ,  they  let 
him  give  his  Tythes  and  Temple  to  whom  he  pleafe,  and  they  will 
truft  their  fouls  with  fuch  as  they^lare,  and  fafely  may.  But  if  he 
will  chufe  and  offer  them  one  whom  they  can  fafely  and  comfor- 
tably accept,  fo  as  Tythes  and  Temples  (hall  preponderate  in  cafe 
of  fmall  difference  in  the  men,  prudence  obligeth  them  to  accept 
of  the  advantage.  The  fame  I  fay  of  the  Magiftrates  countenance 
and  approbation.  But  if  the  difference  be  very  great,  it's  better 
ftretch  our  purfes  to  build  new  Temples  and  pay  our  Paftors  than 
trufl;  our  fouls  on  the  Paftoral  Conduct  of  ignorant,  malignant, 
unfaithful  or  heretical  men. 

S-  6.  V.  I  have  oft  faid,  that  mutual  confent  is  neceffary  to  the 
being  of  the  relation  of  Paftor  and  Flecks  And  though  fometimes 
the  Rulers  impofition,  and  the  Patrons  choice,  may  make  it  the 
Peoples  duty  in  prudence  to  confent^  when  the  good  preponderates 
the  hurt,  (not  t\k)  yet  till  they  confent%  the  Relation  is  not  exiftent* 
As  if  Children  were  bound  to  take  Wives  and  Husbands  by  the 
Command  and  fore  choice  of  Parents,  yet  it's  no  Marriage  till  they 
conient. 

$.  7.  The  common  objection  is  from  the  inconvenience,  if  the  fe- 
veral  parties  agree  not :  To  which  I  anfwer. 

1.  The  mifchief  of  the  contrary  way,  is  worfe  than  that  incon- 
venience. 

2.  There  is  nothing  in  this  World  without  inconveniences  where 
all  things  and  perfons  and  aftions  areimperfeft. 

r  *  1.  If 


C       ) 

j.  If  Parents  and  Children  agree  not  about  their  Marriage,  it 
hath  great  inconveniences*,  And  yet  neither  Parents  Government,  nor 
Childrens  conferring  Liberty  muft  be  denyed. 

4.  In  fo  weighty  a  Cafe,  divers  Locks  and  Keys  keep  the  Chur- 
ches treafure  fafe.  Prince,  Patron,  People  and  Ordainers,  will 
not  fo  often  agree  on  a  vile  perlon,  as  any  one  of  them  alone  may 
do. 

§.  8.  And  now  judge  how  Logically,  how  honeftly  the  Dodtor  hath 
ftated  the  Cafe,  and  made  me  Intolerably  indiscreet  and  tragical  a- 
gainft  Magiftrates,  Patrons  and  Laws*  And  try  if  you  can  under- 
ftand  what  it  is  inftead  of  this,  that  he  would  have:  I  tell  hima- 
gain,  that  if  he  deny  the  necejfity  of  the  flocks  confent  to  the  mutual  re- 
lation, he  notoriouQy  oppofeth  the  judgment  and  pra&ice  of  Anti- 
quity and  the  Univerfal  Church,  of  Princes,  Patriarchs,  Prelates, 
Councils  and  People,  and  fights  againft  the  full  ftream  of  Hiftori- 
cal  evidence,  for  a  new  crooked  way,  that  would  make  as  many 
modes  of  Religion  as  there  are  different  Princes. 

And  here  he  wonders  what  he  faid,  that  occafiomd  fuch  undecent 
fajfion.  It  feems  he  felt  fome  paffion  in  reading  it,  and  thought 
he  muft  have  the  like  that  wrote  ir.  And  fo  let  any  man  obtrude 
any  pernicious  thing  on  the  Church,  and  he  can  eafily  prove  the 
detector  to  have  undecent  paffion ,  for  giving  a  bad  Caufe  its  pro- 
per name. 

$ .  9.  But  he  cannot  find  out  the  reafon  of  my  inference,  that  then 
Princes  may  impofe  what  Religion  they  pleafe.2 

Anfy.  Not  underftanding,  with  fome  men,  goes  for  confuting : 
To  put  L  Religion  ]  for  the  mode  of  Religion  is  too  little  a  (lip  of 
his  to  be  infifted  on.  But  is  not  my  inference  neceffary  ?  I  urged 
him  to  tell  me,  in  what  Countries,  and  under  what  fort  of  Princes 
the  Rule  holds,  that  the  People  muft  not  judge  whether  the  offer- 
ed Paftors  be  Hereticks,  norrefufe  them,  if  Prince  and  Patron  pre- 
fent  them  f  He  will  not  be  entreated  to  tell  me.  I  tell  him,  thai 
if  the  Rule  be  univerfal,  when  a  Papift,  Socinian,  Anabaptift,  Anti- 
cpifcopal,  &c  Prince  and  Patron  prefent  men  of  their  own  mind, 
and  they  are  inftituted,  the  People  muft  take  and  truft  them  as  their 
Paftors :  And  is  not  this  to  fct  up  in  all  the  Churches  what  modiih 
Religion  Prince  and  Patron  pleafe/  Is  this  hard  to  be  underftood  > 

Yet 


Yet  he  calls  this  Railing  on  him  for  [ufpofitiorts  of  my  own  making.    And 
here  he  fteps  over  to  another  man. 

$.  10.  Before  I  come  to  his  undertakings,  I  will  repeat  anothers 
railing  and  undecent  paflion  againft  his  Caufe  *,  And  I  defire  the  Rea- 
der to  note  how  well  the  Doctors  of  the  Church  of  England  agree  •, 
and  to  learn  which  of  them  it  is  that  we  mult  believe,  both  as  to 
Hiftory  and  Right.  It  is  Mr.  Herbert  Thomdike  in  his  Treatife  of 
Forbearance  of  Penal.  [  u  It  is  to  no  purpofe  to  talk  of  Reforma- 
u  don  in  the  Church,  to  regular  Government,  without  reftoring 
ct  the  Liberty  of  chufing  Bifhops  and  the  priviledge  of  enjoying 
"them,  to  the  Synods,  Clergy  and  People  of  each  Diocefs.  So  evident 
*'  is  the  right  of  Synods,  Clergy  and  People  in  the  making  of  thofe 
"of  whom  they  confift,  and  by  whom  they  are  to  be  Governed, 
iC  that  I  need  make  no  other  reafon  of  the  negledt  of  Epifcopacy, 
<v  than  thenegledtof  it  .3 

Yet  thefe  two  are  Doftors  of  one  Church,  but  we  are  no  Mem- 
bers of  it. 

§.  ii.  1  again  fay  that  either  the  Reader  hath  read  the  Church 
Hiftory  and  Canons,  or  not  ?  If  nor,  how  can  he  tell  who  to  be- 
lieve that  report  them?  theDo&oror  me?  But  if  he  have,  I  will 
no  more  difpute  this  Cafe  with  him,  than  I  would  do  whether  Eng- 
HJh  Parliaments  ufed  to  make  Laws.  He  ispaft  my  conviction  if  he  be 
not  convinced. 

§.  12.  And  I  will  again  fay,  that  I  will  yet  fuppofe  the  Dodtor 
fo  humble  as  to  acknowledge  himfelf  much  inferiour  to  Paulas  far- 
pi  fervita  venertwt,  in  point  of  Church*  Hiftory  :  At  lea  ft  I  fay  to  the 
Reader,  perufe  what  he  hath  faid  of  this  Controverfie  and  of  the 
alteration  of  Church  Government  in  his  Hiftory  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  and  his  Book  of  Church  Benefices,  lately  tranflated  by  Dr, 
Denton,  and  doubt  if  you  can. 

§.  13.  And  in  general  I  add:  I.  I  fuppofe  no  man  of  fuch  read- 
ing maketh  any  doubt  of  the  firft  300  years,  whether  any  Bifhops 
were  made  over  any  Church  withouc  the  free  Election  or  Confent 
of  the  Flocks  and  the  whole  Clergy,  and  the  approbation  of  the 
Ordainers.    I  will  #ot  for  ftiame  Itay  to  prove  this,  having  faid  fo 

muck 


(     ; 

much  of  it  in  my  firft  Plea  for  Peace,  and  Eplfcopal  Church  Hiftory, 
which  are  unanfwered. 

II.  And  (ince  the  firft  $00  years,  it's  fo  notorious  in  Hiftorythat 
it's  a  ihame  to  need  proof  of  it,  that  the  Chriftian  Emperours  con- 
firmed the  Churches  in  this  right  and  ufe,  and  for  many  hundred 
years  after,  permitted  and  ordered,  that  Bifhops  fhould  be  chofen 
by  the  People,  Clergy  and  Synods,  and  when  the  Peoples  Election 
was  infringed,  the  neceflity  of  their  confent  long  continued  .*  And 
it  was  only  in  the  choice  of  the  five  Patriarchs  that  the  Emperours 
ufed  to  meddle,  and  that  not  always,  nor  at  all  chufing  them  alone, 
but  commending  fome  one  to  the  People  and  Clergy  to  chufe,  or 
confirming  fome  one  that  they  had  nominated.  And  this  held  on  till 
Popery  fprung  up. 

III.  And  even  then  the  Popes  long  continued  it  :■  But,  i.  They 
ftrove  (fpecially  in  Hildebrand's  days  and  after)  againft  the  Empe- 
rours negative  voice  in  the  confirmation  of  Popes,  2.  And  his  ne- 
gative in  Invefting  Bifhops :  But  even  in  this  ftrife,  the  Ele&ion 
was  confeft  to  be  in  the  Clergy,  the  People  chufing  or  freely  con- 
fenting,  and  no  man  to  be  made  their  Bifhop  againft  their  will ;  and 
it  was  but  the  Inveftiture  perbaculum  &  annulum,  as  a  confirmation 
which  the  Emperours  claimed. 

§.  14.  I  have  formerly  named  elder  Teftimonies  not  denied  .•  I 
will  now  recite  but  fome  Canons  of  Councils. 

i.  The  9f/?and  10th  Canonsofthe  firft  great Nicene  Council. nul-- 
lifieth  the  very  Ordination  of  fcandalous  uncapable  men  :  And  in 
the  Arab-  Can.  4.  Si  populo  placebit,  is  made  a  condition  of  the  E- 
pifcopal  relation.  Andc  5.  in  cafe  of  the  Peoples  difagreement,  the 
faid  People  muft  take  the  moft  blamelefs. 

2.  The  Roman  Council  faid  to  be  under  Silvefter  of  275  Bifhops 
faith,  [_No  Bijhop  Jhall  Ordain  any  Gierke  >  nifi  cum  omni  adunata  Ec- 
clefta,  but  with  all  the  Church  united.  If  this  Council  be  not  cer- 
tain,  the  very  forgers  fhew  the  Antiquity  of  the  Churches  right  and 
cuftom. 

3.  I  before  named  a  Council  at  Capua  that  decreed  that  the 
two  Bifhops  at  Antioch  chofen  by  their  two  Churches,  fhould  live  in 
Love  and  Peace. 

4.  Chryfoftoms  Church  offoannites  would  rather  feparate  than  for- 
fake  their  chofen  Bifhop  or  his  honour,  though  Emperour,Council  and 

Patriarch 


(  l29  ) 

Patriarch  was  againft  him  .•  and  though  Cyril  Alex,  wrote  that  their 
breach  of  Canons  was  intolerable,  and  to  tolerate  them  (afewftub- 
born  Nonconforming)  would  butdifcourage  the  obedient. 

5.  Even  the  famous  Pope  Caleftine  who  helpt  Auftm  againft  the 
Pelagians  Decreed  \_Let  no  man  he  given  a  Bifiop  to  the  unwilling  :  Let 
the  fenfe  and  deftre  of  the  Clergy,  the  Laity,  and  Magiftracy  (ordwis)  be 
required  for  necefTary  .)~\ 

6.  How  the  people  depofed  Theodofius  Bifhop  of  Synada  and  chole 
another  and  the  change  approved,  1  have  eife where  (hewed. 

7.  After  Aniens  death  the  Clergy  at  Conftantimple  were  for  Philip 
or  Proclus,  but  the  people  chofe  Sifmnius  and  prevailed. 

8.  Sifmnius  fent  Proclus  to  be  Bifhop  at  Cyzjcum,  but  the  people 
refufed  him  and  chofe  another. 

9.  The  Orleance  Council,  477.540.  Can,  \.  decreeth  about  Ordain- 
ing Bijhops,  Qui  praponendus  eft  omnibus  ah  omnibus  eligatur :  as  of  old, 
viz.*    Let  him  he  chofen  hy  all,  who  is  to  hefet  over  all. 

10.  An.  541.  The  Concil.  Avem.  decree  c.  2.  That  none  feek^the 
f acred  Office  of  a  Bifliop  hy  Votes  hut  hy  merit,  nor  feem  to  get  a  Divine 
Office,  rebus  fed  moribus :  and  that  he  afcend  to  the  top  of  that  eminent 
dignity  hy  the  ttetlion  of  ally  and  not  hy  the  favour  of  a  few :  and  that  in 
chufing  Priefts  there  he  the  greatell  care,  hecaufe,  &c» 

Therefore  another  Council  at  Orleance  decreed  that  a  Bifhop  mull 
be  ordained  in  his  own  Church  which  he  mull  overfee. 

1 1.  Another  Orleance  Council  decree,  c.  10  That  none  get  a  Bifhoprick^ 
by  gifts  or  feeding,  hut  with  the  will  of  the  King,  hy  the  election  of  the  Clergy 
and  the  Lay-people.  And  Can.  1 1.  And  as  the  ancient  Canons  have  de- 
creed, Let  none  he  made  Bifhop  to  an  unwilling  People  (or  without  the  Peo- 
ples con  fent)  Nor  let  the  People  or  the  Clergy  he  inclined  to  con  fent,  hy  the 
opprejfion  of  perjons  in  power  (a  thing  not  lawful  to  he  fpok$n.)  But  if  it  he 
otherwife  done,  let  the  Bifliof  he  for  ever  depofed,  &c. 

12.  I  have  formerly  cited  Pope  Gregory  I.  his  exprefs  Decrees 
herein. 

15.  Clodovtus  his  Council  at  Cahilone  renewed  the  old  Decree,  That 
all  Ordination  of  Biftiops  he  null,  which  was  otherwife  made  than  by  the  c- 
Uttionof  the  Com-  Provincials,  the  Clergy  and  the  Citizens. 

14.  The  General  Council  called  Quincfextum,  an.  691.  decreed 
Can.  22.  That  Biceps  and  Priefts  Ordained  with  Money,  and  net  hy Exami- 
nation and  Eletlion,  he  depofed  :  Though  the  fame  Council  by  humane 
wifdom  decreed,  Can.  38.  That  what fcever  alteration  the  Imperial  pow- 
er maketh  on  any  City,  the  Ecclefiaftrcal  Order  alfo  follow  it.  1  he  way  by 

S  which 


(  i?o  ) 

which  Humane  Order  overthrew  Divine  Order  and  Initiations. 

1 5.  And  by  the  way  you  may  conje&ure  of  cheChufers  by  the  Coun- 
cil of  Toletane,  an.  693.  under  King  Egica,  where  the  King  Preaching 
to  the  Bifhops  (as  was  then  needful,)  decreeth,  That  every  Parijh  that 
hath  twelve  Families  have  their  proper  Governour.  But  if  it  have  lefs 
than  twelve,  itjhall  be  part  of  another* s  charge. 

16.  K-  Pepin  (who  advanced  the  Pope  to  advance  himfelf,  and  add- 
ed the  Sword  to  Excommunication  by  mifchievous  decree,  yet)  al- 
tered not  the  common  way  of  Election,  and  decreeth  that  every  City 
(like  our  Corporations)  have  a  Bifhop,  and  none  meddle  in  another's 
Diocefs  without  his  confent. 

17.  The  choice  of  Pope  Conftantine,  the  humiliation  of  Stephen,  and 
many  fuch  inftances  (hew  that  even  at  Rome  ftill  the  People  had  the 
greatefthandin  chufing  the  Pope }  and  that  to  Communicate  with  a 
Bifhop  irregularly  chdfen,  was  taken  for  a  great  fin.  And  when 
Charles  Mag.  was  gratified  as  to  the  Papal  Chair,  it  was  but  by  making 
him  a  neceflary  Confirmer. 

18.  The  Frfffcfc  Conftitutions,  /.  i.e.  84.  objected  about  this  by  Ba- 
ronius  and  Binius,  fay,  Not  being  ignorant  of  the  fac$ed  Canons,  we 
confentedto  the  Ecclefiajlick^  Orders,  to  wit,  that  Bifhops  be  chofen  by  the 
Eletlion  of  the  Clergy  and  People,  according  to  the  Statutes  of  the  Canons ,  out 
of  their  own  Diocefs,  without  refpetl  of  perfons  or  rewards,  for  the  merit  of 
their  life,  and  their gift  of  wifdom,  that  by  example  and  Word  they  may  every 
way  profit  thofe  that  are  under  them. 

19.  The  old  Canons  gathered  by  Pope  Adrian  and  fent  to  Charles 
Magn.  recorded  by  Caniftus,  depofe  a  Bifhop,  Presbyter  or  Deacon,  - 
guilty  of  Theft,  Fornication  or  Perjury,  And  Can.  28.  ABtflwpwho 
obtaineth  a  Church  by  the  fecular  power,  jhall  be  depofed.  And  Can.  33. 
That  no  one  yray  with  Hereticks  or  Schifmaticks :  Ex  cone.  Sard.  Can.  2. 
A  Bifiop  that  by  ambition  changeth  his  feat,  jhall  not  have  fo  much  as  Lay 
Communion  at  his  end:  That  no  Bijhop  be  above  three  wee\s  in  another  City, 
nor  above  two  weeks  from  his  own  Church.  Can.  17.  A  Bifhop  contraditled 
(by  oppofers)  fiiaU  not  after  be  ordained  or  purged  by  only  three  Bifhops, 
but  by  many. 

And  Can.  94.  The  people  converted  from  Here  fie  by  another  Bifhop,  may 
beiof  Sis  flocks  without  removing  their  ParijJi  dwelling  where  another  is 
Bijhop. 

Amongfl  the  other  80  Canons  againfl  oppreffion,  as  one  is,  That  ■ 
no  Bifljop  judge  any  Priefi  without  the  prefence  of  his  Clergy,  it  being  void 
if  mtfo  confirmed;.  So  another  is.  againfl:  all  foreign  Judgment,  becaufe 

men- 


( i3i ; 

men  mufl  be  judged  by  thofe  that  are  chofen  by  themfelves  and  not  by  grangers- 
And  none  of  the  Clergy  muft  be  condemned  till  lawful  Accufers  be  prefent> 
and  the  Accufed  anfwer  the  Charge. 

20.  The  fecond  General  Council  at  Nice,  though  by  fervility  they 
were  for  Images,  held  to  the  old  Church-Canons  for  Elections,  fay- 
ing Can.  5.  *  Every  Election  of  a  Bifhop,  Prieft  or  Deacon,  which  is 
'made  by  Magiftrates,  fhall remain  void,  by  the  Canon  which  faith, 
'  If  any  Bifhop  ufe  the  fecular  Magiftrates,  to  obtain  by  them  a  Church, 
4  let  him  be  depofed  and  feparaced,  and  all  that  Communicate  with 
1  him. 

How  much  more  fay  thefe  than  my  \intolerable  indifcretionQ  I  fear 
fome  will  think  that  all  this  binds  them  to  more  feparation  than  I 
am  for. 

The  15  Can.  forbids  them  to  have  two  Churches. 

Can.  4.  condemneth  thofe  to  Lex  talionis,  as  unfufferably  mad,that 
faultily  drive  any  from  the  Miniftry,  and  fegregate  them  from  the 
Clergy,  or  (hut  up  the  Temples,  forbidding  God's  wrorfhip. 

21.  By  the  way,  a  Council  at  Chalons  under  Charles  Magn.  finding 
fome  Prelates  fetting  on  foot  an  Oath  of  Obedience  to  them,  thus  con- 
demn it: 

c  It  is  reportedof  fome  Brethren (Bifhops  j  that  they  force  them 
*  that  they  are  about  to  Ordain,  to  fwear  that  they  are  worthy,  and 
4  will  not  do  contrary  to  the  Canons,  and  will  be  obedient  to  theBi- 
c  fhop  that  Ordaineth  them,  and  to  the  Church  in  which  they  are  Or- 
c  dained  v  which  Oath,  becaufe  it  is  very  dangerous,  we  all  ordain 
1  fhall  be  forbidden,]  which  other  Councils  after  repeat,  f yet  our 
Bifhops  reft  much  on  fuch  an  Oath  of  obedience  to  them.) 

22.  What  the  Electing  Churches  were  may  be  partly  conjectured 
from  the  Concil.  Regiaticin.  in  Canifius,  Can.  6.  That  the  Arch  Presbyters 
examine  every  Mafler  of  a  Family  particularly,  and  take  account  of  their 
Families  and  lives,  &c 

A  Council  at  Soifons  about  852.  (  a  Presbyter  by  the  King's  Com- 
mand being  Ordained  to  the  Church  of  Rhemes  irregularly;  Decree, 
That  they  that  are  made  Presbyters  without  examination  by  ignorance,  or 
by  diffimulation  of  the  Ordainers,  when  they  are  known  ft ail be  depofed,  be- 
caufe the  Catholick  Church  defevdeth  that  which  is  irreprehenjible,  &c. 

23.  An  855.  under  Lotharius  Rennigins  Lugd,  and  others,  at  a  Cou  :.- 
cil  decreed,  (becaufe  that  bad  King  had  by  impofing  corrupted  tie 
Clergy)   c  That  becaufe  Bifhops  were  fet  over  the  Cities  that  wei\ 

i  tryed,  andalmoft  ignorant  of  Letters,  and  unlike  the  Apoftolick 

S  2  •fitript, 


(r3z) 

c  fcript,  by  which  means  the  Ecclefiaftical  vigor  is  loft,  they  will  pe- 
4  tition  the  King  that  when  a  Bifhop  was  wanting,  the  Canonical  Ele&L- 
c  o  n  by  the  Clergy  and  the  People  may  be  permitted,  that  men  of  try- 
'edknowledg  and  life,  and  not  illiterate  men,  blinded  by  covetouf- 
c  nefs,  may  be  fet  Bifhops  over  the  Flocks. 

24.  An.  857.  Pope  Nk.  I.  isehofen  by  the  Emperour  Ludovictu 
confent,  and  by  All  the  People.  And  he  fo  far  maketh  the  People  felf- 
feparating  judges,  as  to  decree,  Tit.  1  i.-c.  1.    c  That  none  hear  the 

*  Mafs  of  a  Prieft  whom  he  knoweth  undoubtedly  to  have  a  Concu- 
4  bine  or  fub- introduced  Woman.  And  Can.  2.  That  by  the  Canons 

*  he  cannot  have  the  honour  of  Priefthood,  that  is  fain  into  Forni- 

*  cation. 

25.  An.  1050,  (or  thereabout)  one  of  the  worft  of  Popes  at  a 
Council  at  Rhemes.  was  conftrained  to  confirm  the  old  Canon  9  'That 
4  no  man  be  promoted  to  Church-Government  but  with  the  ele&ion 
c  of  the  Clerks  and  the  People,  &c. 

26.  An*  1059.  Again  a  Roman  Council  forbidding  all  men  to  joyn 
with  a  fornicating  Prieft,  maketh  them  fo  far  feparating  judges. 

27.  About  An*  1077.  A  Council  at  Rome  reneweth  the  Canon, 
nulling  all  Ordinations  made,  ant  pretio,  precibus  ant  ebfequie,  or  that 
are  not  made  by  the  common  confent  of  Clergy  and  People  -0  for  fuch 
enter  not  by  Chrift,  &c 

28.  From  hence  the  Popes  grew  to  ufurp  moft  of  the  power  in  chu- 
fing  Bifhops  to  themfelves  by  degrees,  till  they  got  Councils  to  judg 
it  Herefie  for  Emperours  to  claim  fo  much  as  a  confirming  inveftiture. 
Whence  bloody  Warsrofe.  And  it's  greatly  to  be  noted  that  yet 
thefe  Emperours  fuppofed  the  Bifhops  ele&ed  by  the  Clergy  and  Peo- 
ple, and  claimed  but  the  faid  inveftiture,  as  is  feen  in  the  formuU  of 
Pope  Pafchals  Grant  of  inveftitures  to  them. 

29:  When  they  made  Princes  Inveftiture  Sacrilege  (and  entring 
by  them,)  they  fo  far  made  the  People  judges  of  Priefts  and  Communi- 
on,  asin  a  Council  at  Benevent.  an.  ioSj.  fnb  Vitt-  to  decree,  c  That 

*  if  no  Catholick  Prieft  be  there,  it's  righter  to  perflft  without  vifible 
4  Communion,  and  to  Communicate  invifibly  with  the  Lord,  than  by 

*  taking  it  from  an  Heretick  to  be  feparated  from  God.  For  what  con- 
'cord  hath  Chrift  and  Belial?  AndSimoniacks  are  Infidels. 

30.  But  were  good  and  bad  Bifhops  in  all  Ages  thus  minded,  or 
was  it  only  Popes  ?  I  next  add  that  it  was  one  of  the  Articles  charg- 
ed againft  Wieklife  the  Reformer  (as  before  againft  Wecelo,  who  con- 
temned their  Excommunications)  That  they  that  give  over  Preaching  or 

hearing 


(  i33) 


hearing  Gods  word,  for  mens  Excommunications,  are  Excommunicato)  and 
in  the  day  of  judgment  jhall  be  judged  traitors  toChrift-  Art.  13.  in  Cone 
Conft. 

Reader,  are  we  not  in  a  hard  ftrait  between  Wkktiffe  and  Dr.  StiU 
lingfieet  f 

31.  The  fame  is  one  of  the  Articles  againft  John  Hus,  That  nfca 
muft  not  for  Excommunications  give  over  preaching.  We  grant  that 
they  mean  unjufi  ones* 

32.  This  became  one  of  the  great  Controverfies  with  the  Bohemians  y 
againft  whom  one  of  the  four  long  Orations  were  made  at  Cone*  BaftL 
They  would  never  yield  that  their  chofen  Minifters  fhould  obey  the 
Silencers. 

53.  Laftly,  the  Romans  themfelves  oft  decreed,  That  a  fimoniacd e- 
lettion  even  of  the  Pope  is  plainly  null,  and  conferreth  no  right  or  authority 
tothcelefted  (though  this  certainly  overthroweth  the  uninterrupted- 
nefs  of  their  own  Succeffion.)  And  how  Popes  were  elected  till  the 
device  of  Cardinals,  is  well  known. 

§.  15.  If  all  this  be  not  enough  to  prove  the  conftant  confentof 
the  Chriftian  Churches  down  from  the  Apoftles  for  the  neceffity  of 
the  Flocks  confent  to  the  relation  of  the  Bifhop  and  Paftors  to  them* 
Let  him  that  would  have  more  read  all  that  Blondel  hath  producedr 
de  jure  plebis  in  regim*  Ecclef 

§.  16.  I  lhall  next  prove  the  faid  neceffity  from  the  nature  of  the 
thing,  the  work  and  benefit,  and  the  common  nature,  intereft  and 
reafon  of  mankind,  if  more  light  will  not  put  out  the  eyes  of  fome 
unwilling  men,  that  are  loth  to  know  w4iat  they  cannot  eafily  be  ig- 
norant of. 

And  1.  Propriety  is  in  order  of  nature  antecedent  to  Regiment,, 
which  fuppofeth  it,  and  is  to  order  the  ufe  of  it  for  common  fafety 
and  good. 

2.  As  a  mans  propriety  in  his  Member?,  Children,  acquisitions,  is 
antecedent  to  Regiment,  fo  much  more  in  his  foul  which  is  himfelf. 

3.  Nature  obligeth  all  to  care  for  their  lives,  but  yet  thofe  muft 
fometimebe  hazarded  for  publick good.  But  the  obligation  to  pleafe 
God  and  obtain  Salvation  and  efcape  Sin  and  Hell,  is  fo  great,  that 
no  man  is  to  pretend  publick  good  or  the  will  of  man  againft  it. 

4. 'Self-government  (as  to  power  and  obligation,)  is  antecedent  to 
humane  publicletGovernment  in  order  of  Nature :  And  publick  Go- 
vernment dotf  Qfot  deftroy  it,  but  regulate  it  .•  And  therefore  is 
not  for  deftruftion  but  for  edification. 

*  The 


( m ) 

5.  The  end  of  Self-government  is  fo  much  to  pleafe  God  and  fave 
our  Souls,  that  no  man  on  pretence  of  publick  Government  can  dif- 
oblige  us  from  this. 

d.  God  hath  in  the  fifth  Commandment,  which  fetleth  humane  Go- 
vernment and  obedience,  chofen  the  name  of  Parents  rather  than  Prin- 
ces, becaufe  Parents  Government  is  antecedent  to  Princes,  and  Prin-' 
ces  cannot  take  it  from  them ,  nor  difoblige  their  Children.  But  Self- 
government  is  more  natural  than  Parents,  and  Parents  and  Princes 
muft  help  it,   but  not  deftroy  it. 

7.  When  perfons  want  natural  capacity  for  Self-government  fas 
Infants  and  Ideots  and  mad-men)  they  are  to  be  governed  by  force  as 
bruits,  being  not  capable  of  more. 

8.  Family  Government  being  in  order  next  to  perfonal,  Princes  or 
Bifhops  have  no  right  to  overthrow  it,  (at  lead  except  in  part  on  flaves 
of  whofe  lives  they  have  abfolute  power.-)  If  the  King  impofe  Wives, 
Servants,  and  Diet  on  all  his  Subjects,  they  may  lawfully  chufe  fitter 
for  themfelves  if  they  can  •,  and  at  leaft  may  refufe  unmeet  Wives 
and  Servants,  and  mortal  or  hurtful  Meats  and  Drinks. 

9.  Much  more  if  Princes  and  Patrons  will  impofe  on  all  men,  the 
Bifhops  and  Pallors,  to  whofe  charge,  care  and  Paftoral  conduct  they 
muft  commit  their  Souls,  the  people  having  the  nea  reft  right  of  choice, 
and  ftrongeft  obligation,  muft  refufe  (as  difcerning  Self-governing 
judges)  fuch  whole  herefle,  negligence,  ignorance,  malignity,  or 
treachery,  is  like  either  apparently  to  hazard  them,  or  to  deprive 
them  of  that  Paftoral  help  which  they  find  needful  for  them,  and 
they  have  right  to  as  well  as  other  men. 

lb.  The  gain  or  lofs  is  more  the  Patients  than  the  Impofers/.  It  is 
their  own  Sou's  that  are  like  to  be  profited  and  faved  by  needful  helps, 
or  loft  for  want  of  them :  And  therefore  it  moft  concerns  themfelves, 
to  know  what  helps  they  chufe. 

11.  If  all  the  Kings  on  earth  command  men  to  truft  their  lives. to  a 
Phyfician  who  they  have  juft  caufe  to  believe,  is  like  to  kill  them,  by 
ignorance,  errour,  or  treachery,  or  to  a  Pilot  or  Boat-man  that  is  like 
to  drown  them,  they  are  not  bound  to  obey  fuch  mandates.  Yea  if 
they  know  an  able  faithful  Phyfician  that  is  moft  like  to  cure  them,they 
may  chufe  him  before  an  unknown  man,  though  the  King  be  againit 
their  choice. 

12.  Scripture  and  experience  tell  us,  that  God  wArfceth  ufually  ac- 
cording to  the  aptitude  of  means  and  inftruments*f/<ftd  learned  ex- 
perienced Phyficians  cure  more  than  the  ignorant,  rafh,  and  flothful ; 

and 


(■Ms) 

and  good  Scholars  make  their  Pupils  more  learned  than  the  ignorant 
do.  And  skilful,  able,  experienced  holy  Pallors,  convert  and  edifie 
much  more  than  ignorant  and  vicious  men  :  And  means  mult  accord- 
ingly be  chofen. 

i  j.  If  the  Paftoral  work  skilfully  and  faithfully  done,  be  needful, 
it  muft  not  be  neglefled  whoever  forbid  it :  If  it  be  not  needful,  what 
is  the  Church  of  England  good  for,  more  than  Infidels,  or  at  leaft 
than  Mofcovites  f  And  for  what  are  they  maintained  by  Tythes,  Glebe, 
and  all  the  dignities,  honours  and  wealth  they  have?  And  for  what 
do  men  fo  much  contend  for  them  ? 

14  It  is  natural  to  generate  the  like  ;  and  for  men  to  do  and  chufe 
astheyare,  andastheir  intereft  leadeth  them.  Chrift  tellsushow 
hard  it  is  for  a  rich  man  to  be  faved,  and  how  fewfuch  prove  good. 
And  the  Clergy  themfelves  do  not  fay  that  all  the  Patrons  in  England 
are  wife  and  pious:  Many  Parliaments  have  by  our  Church-men  been 
deeply  accufed :  And  moft  Parliament  men,  I  think,  arc  Patrons :  O- 
thers  fay,  that  mod:  Patrons  not  chofen  to  Parliaments  are  worfc.  Some 
Preachers  complain  of  Great  men  for  fornication,  drunkennefs,  ex- 
cefs,  idlenefs,  yea,  Atheifm  or  infidelity.-  If  many  or  any  be  fuch, 
are  they  like  to  chufe  fuch  Paftors  as  all  godly  men  may  truft  in  fo 
great  a  Cafe?  Or  would  not  fuch  Princes  chufe  fuch  Bifhops? 

15.-  Men  are  asableandasmuch  obliged  now  to  take  heed  to  whole 
condudt  they  trult  their  Souls,  as  they  were  in  all  former  Ages  of  the 
Church,  forecited. 

16.  The  Laws  and  Bifhops  of  England  allow  all  men  liberty  to  chufe 
what  Church  and  Paftor,  that  Conformeth,  they  pleafe  ^  fo  they  will 
but  remove  their  dwellings  into  the"  Parifh  which  they  affect.  And 
in  London  thoufands  live  as  Lodger's,  and  may  eafily  go  under  whom 
they  will  chufe ',  And  if  they  like  him  not,  may  fhifc  as  oft  as  they 
pleafe. 

17.  Parifh  bounds  are  of  much  ufe  for  Order :  But  Order  is  for  the 
thing  ordered,  and  not  againft  it :  And  Parifh  bounds  being  of  humane 
make,  cannot  juftlybe  preferr'd  before  the  needful  edification  and 
fafety  of  mens  Souls,  though  fuch  humane  Laws  bind,  where  there  are 
no  greater  obligations  againft  them. 

18.  The  Law  of  keeping  to  PariftvChurches  where  we  dwell,  and 
the  Law  that  giveth  Patrons  the  choice  of  all  the  Paftors,  and  Princes 
of  Bifhops,  are  of  the  fame  efficient  power  andftrength. 

19-  Cafuifts  ufually  fay  (even  Papifts  that  are  too  much  for  Papal 
power )  that  humane  Laws  bind  not  when  they  are  againft  the  end, 

the 


(i30 

the  common  good,  efpecially  againft  mens  falration.  And  a  Toletm 
Council  decreeth,  that  none  of their  Canons  fhatt  be  interpreted  to  bind  ad 
culpam,  but  ad  pcenam,  left  they  caufe  mens  damnation.  And  many  Ca- 
fuifts  fay,  that  Penal  Laws  bind  only  to  do  or  fufFer,  and  bearing  the 
penalty  fatisfieth  them,  fave  as  to  fcandal. 

20.  Yetweftill  acknowledge  all  the  right  in  Princes  and  Patrons 
before-mentioned,  and  that  Princes  are  bound  to  promote  Learning 
and  piety,  and  fo  to  fee  that  due  places,  countenance  and  maintenance 
encourage  faithful  Minifters,  and  that  all  the  Subjects  have  meet  Tea- 
chers, and  fubmit  to  hear  and  learn  •,  And  that  they  fhould  reftrain 
Hereticks  and  Soul-betrayers,  from  the  facred  Office- work  *,  andjudg 
who  are  to  be  maintained,  and  who  to  be  tolerated. 

21.  But  this  power  is  not  abfolute  but  bounded  :  And  if  on  the 
pretence  of  it,  they  would  betray  the  Churckand  ftarvc  Souls  ( like  the 
Englijh  Canon  that  binds  all  from  going  to  an  able  Paftor  at  the  next 
Parifh,  from  an  ignorant  unpreaching  vicious  Reader,)  men  are  not 
bound  to  obey  it,  but  to  provide  better  for  themfelve:  funleft  ?nateri- 
ally,  not  formally  forfome  time,  when  not  obeying  ;;:>uld  do  more 
hurt  than  good  •, )  or  as  a  man  muft  forbear  publick  afiimblies  in  a 
common  Plague-time. 

And  fo  much  to  open  the  true  reafon  of  the  cafe  in  hand.  And 
PauPs  words  to  Timothy  %  iTim.4.  16.  tell  me,  this  care  is  not  unne- 
cessary, Take  heed  to  thy  felf  and  to  the  dottrine,  and  continue  in  them\ 
for  in  doing  this  thoufloalt  both  fave  thy  felf  and  them  that  hear  thee. 

§.  17.  1  come  now  to  the  Doctor's  words,  who  p.  3 1 2.  undertakes 
to  prove,  1.  That  the  main  ground  of  the  peoples  Inter efl  was  founded  on 
the  Apoftles  Canon    C  A  Bijhop  muft  be  blamelefs.2 

Anf  The  word  [main"}  may  do  him  fervice,  but  no  hurt  to  my 
caufe.  ZMain}  fignifieth  net  \Only\\  who  doubts  but  the  People 
were  todifcern  the  Lives  of  chofen  perform?  But  (without  coming 
to  the  Ballance,  among  many  caufes  which  is  the  main)  I  have  proved 
that  there  were  more;  And  among  others,  thac  Chriftandhis  Apo- 
ftles bid  them  take  heed  how  they  hear:  beware  of  falfe  Prophets^  and  their 
leaven :  beware  of  the  concifion.  A  man  that  is  an  Heretic!^  avoid,  —  Bid 
them  not  good  f peed:  Let  no  man  deceive ycux — Thofe  that  caufe  divifons 
and  offences  contrary  to  the  dottrine  ye  have  learned,  avoid \ — fromfuch  turn 
away. — Is  here  no  more  than  judging  their  lives? 

§.  18.  Here  he  come th  to  prove  this  even  by  Cyprian's  Epiftle.a- 
gainft  Martial  and  Bafilides  :  I  muft  not  name  his  dealing  with  it, 
left  he  fay  I  rail.    But  I  may  note,  1.  that  he  faith,  \jhe  force  of  what 

Cyprian 


(  *37) 

Cyprian    faith   comes  at   laft  only   to  this  giving   Teftimeny.~] 

Anfw.  Only  here  is  more  than  Main  before.  And  though  it  was  a 
matter  of  fcandal  that  was  before  there,  and  therefore  it  is  no  won- 
der if  nothing  elfe  be  particularly  fpoken  of  \  yet  fure  thefe  words 
(ignifie  more  than  Teftimony.  [By  publicly  judgment  and  Teftimony  be 
approved  worthy  and  meet. 2  And  to  be  found  in  the  faith,  and  apt  to  teach 
is  fome  part  of  meetnefs.  And  [  becsuje  they  chiefly  have  power  either 
to  chufe  Priefts  that  are  worthy,  or  refufe  the  Unworthy. ~]  A  chief  chafing 
power  of  the  worthy  is  more  than  a  meer  teftimony  of  fact.  Again,  [that 
by  the  fuffr age  of  the  whole  fraternity  the  Epifcopzcy  b 2  deliver edto  him7\ 
Suffrage  is  more  than  teftimony  of  fail.  And  [Ail  they  do  fin  who  are  defi- 
led by  the  facrifice of  a  prophane  and  unjuft  ?rieft~\  fignifieth  a  dilfenting 
power,  or  elfe  feparation  were  no  duty. 

But  he  fa[th>This  is  the  ftrongeft  teftimony  in  antiquity  for  the  peoples  power. 
Anfw.  A  ftrange  faying  of  fo  good  an  Hiftorian,  who  may  eafily 
know  that  the  concurrent  judgment  of  all  the  Churches,  their  pra- 
ctice, and  their  Canons,  making  the  Peop'es  confent  fand  ufuallyE- 
le&ionj  neceflary,  was  a  far  ftronger  teftimony  than  one  Epiftle. 
But  to  weaken  this  he  faith, 

1.  It  was  in  a  cafe  where  a  Bifliof  had  voluntarily  refigned. 

Anfw.  i.What'sthatto  the  general  rule  here  aflerted  ?  2.  Was  it 
voluntarily  which  they  were  adjudged  to  do  ?  But  I  find  no  mention  of 
Martial's  voluntary  refigning,  but  only  Bafilides. 

2.  He  faith  [Another  Btfliop  w-as  put  in  his  place ,  not  by  the  power  of 
the  people,  &c'] 

Anfw.  1 .  This  was  before  faid  [that  the  people  might  give  them  power  ? 
No.~]  As  if  he  would  have  the  Reader  think  that  we  hold  the  people 
give  the  power,  which  1  have  fo  oft  difproved.  But  it's  his  advan- 
tage to  talk  to  many  men  at  once,  that  he  may  fay,  fome  of  you  faid  it. 

But  if  diftindion  were  not  a  crime,  I  would  diftinguifh  between  gi- 
ving the  power,  and  concurring  with  other  Caufes  to  give  a  Recep- 
tivity to  the  perfon  that  mufthave  it:  The  peoples  confent  is  a  can- 
fa  partialis,  of  capacity  and  receptivity. 

2.  But  what  fignifie  thefe  words  [The  Ordination  of  our  Collegue  Sabi- 
nus  by  the  fuff rage  of  the  whole  fraternity ',  and  by  the  judgment  of  the  Bi- 
flops,  &c2  Is  not  this  as  much  power  as  we  plead  for  ? 

3.  Are  not  you  the  Author  of  the  Defence  of  B.  Laud,  and  fay.  That 
Chriftgave  the  Keys  to  Peter  as  the  reprefentative  of  the  whole  Church  ?  And 
have  you  now  faid  more  againit  me  or  your  felf  ?  I  am  not  of  that  mind. 

5.  He  faith,  They  had  the  judgment  of  a  whole  Council  for  defer  ting 
him.  T  Anfw. 


(  138) 

Anfw.  Yes,  for  deferting  them  both}  And  that  Council  told  them 
God  had  fore-determined  in  his  word  what  men  mult  or  muftnot  be 
Bifhops,  and  it  was  God  rather  than  they  that  judged  it  and  bound 
them  to  obey  j  and  that  the  power  was  chiefly  in  the  people  to  chufe 
andrefufe  &c.]  Did  you  think  you  had  helpt  your  caufe  by  faying,  It 
was  a  whole  Council  that  was  for  what  we  fay  ? 

4.  He  faith,  It  was  for  Idolatry  andblafphemy  by  his  own  confeffion. 
Anfw.  Which  mean  you  by  [his']  when  they  were  two?  neither  of 

them  were  otherwife  Idolaters  than  as  LibeUaticks  ( who  to  fave  their 
lives  fuffered  other  men  to  fubfcribe  their  names,  thinking  it  was  not 
their  own  deed  ;  like  fome  that  I  have.heard  of,  that  thought  Con- 
formity Perjury,  &c  but  let  a  Friend  bribe  an  Officer  to  fubfcribe 
their  names  and  give  them  a  Certificate  J  And  Eafdides  blafphemy 
was  in  his  ficknefsin  terrour  of  Confidence  and  perhaps  phrenfie. 

5.  He  faith  all  St- Cyprians  proof  is,  that  the  people  were moft con- 
cerned to  give  tefimony  of  life,  &c  This  is  anfwered  already. 

§,  1  p.  His  next  is,  The  people  on  this  ajfuming  the  power  of  Elections* 
caufed  great  dift urbane e  and  diforders  in  the  Church  -,  where  he  goeth 
over  fome  few  of  the  many  inftances,  which  I  have  at  large  recited, 
ZtAntioch,  Rome  j  Alexandria,  &c.  s, 

Anfw.  1.  And  yet  for  all  thefe  diforders,  the  Church  deprived  not 
the  People  of  their  priviledge. 

2.  But  how  fallacioufly  is  this  urged  ?  I  have  fully  elfewhere  open- 
ed to  the  Reader,  how  the  afpiring  Prelates  feeking  Patriarchates 
and  Biihopricks  became  as  fo  many  Captains  at  War,  and  gathered 
Monks,  Clergy  and  People  to  Arrive  and  fight  for  them  ;  And  now  he 
layeth  this  on  the  People  ?  As  if  the  common  Souldiers  and  not  the 
Generals  were  the  caufe  of  the  War?  But  of  this  1  havefaid  enough. 

§.  20.  He  faith,  To  prevent  this  many  Bifhops  were  made  without  the 
choice  of  the  People,  and  Canons  made  to  regulate  Elections. 

A*fw.  Craftily  faid !  He  faith  not  [without  the  confent  of  the  Peo~ 
pie,']  but  [the  Eleclion.~\  And  he  faith  not  that  the  Canons  took  away 
either  conftnting  or  */*#/ȣ  fuflxages,  but  that  they  regulated  them:  Yess 
they  over  and  over  confirmed  them. 

$.  21.  He  faith,  At  Alexandria  the  Election  belonged  to  the  twelve** 
Presbyters. 

Anfw.  They  are  hard  put  to  it  when  they  are  put  to  fly  to  that  te- 
ftimony  which  maketh  Presbyters  the  makersof  Bifhops. 

Hierome  and  Eutychius  Alexand.  tell  you  that  the  Presbyters  chofe  and 
made  the  Bifhops  as  the  Army  doth  a  General:  which  made  Arch- 

Bifhop 


(  135) 

fciihop  Vjher  tell  KingCharUs  theFirfl,  That  the  Presbyters  at  Alexan- 
dria did  more  than  Ordain  Presbyters,  for  they  made  Biihops  fas  he 
told  me  himfelf.J  But  r .  We  never  denied  that  the  Corn-provincial  Bi- 
(hops  ordinarily  afterwards  Ordained  them,  2.  Nor  that  the  Presby- 
ters chofe  them.     Did  the  Dottor  think  this  was  to  the  purpofe  ?   But 

1.  Doth  he  think  that  the  Presbyters  choice  excludech  the  Peoples, when 
it  is  a  known  thing  that  the  Canons  and  Cuftom  conftantly  conjoyned 
them? 

2.  Will  he  conclude  that  whenever  Hiftory  nameth  not  the  Peoples 
choice,  they  are  left  out  ? 

3.  Will  he  perfwade  us  when  the  People  are  not  the  chufers, 
that  they  are  not  neceffarily  the  confenters  or  refufers  ? 

I  will  add  one  more  proof  to  all  before-mentioned.  It  isimpof- 
fible,  exnaturarci^  that  the  Paftoral  Office  fhould  be  exercifed  ondif- 
fenters  .*  Therefore  their  confent  is  neceflary. 

A  Patient  may  be  drencht  like  a  Horfe,  and  cram'd  like  fatted  Fowl, 
and  fo  may  have  a  Phyfician  againft  his  will.  But  a  Soul  cannot  ufe 
Paftoral  help  unwillingly.     1.  He  cannot  unwillingly  be  baptized  : 

2.  Nor  unwillingly  joyn  in  publick  prayer  and  praife  with  the  Church. 

3.  Nor  unwillingly  confefs  fin.  4.  Nor  unwillingly  crave  or  receive 
Minifterial  counfel.  5.  Nor  unwillingly  receive  the  Lords  Supper. 
6.  Nor  unwillingly  defire  the  Pallors  vifitation  and  prayers  in  his  fick- 
nefs.  7.  Nor  unwillingly  feek  and  receive  abfolution,  &c.  I  mean, 
he  can  do  none  of  this  that  doth  not  confent.  And  is  he  a  Paftor  to 
fuch  men  that  refufe  all  this  ?  It's  a  fhame~to  think  that  learned  men 
ihould  bend  their  wits  to  prove  that  the  Sun  is  not  light. 

Did  the  Church  at  Alexandria  ever  after  chufe  their  Bifhops,  and 
not  before  ?  All  the  Alexandrian  Church-Hiftory  tells  us  that  the  peo. 
pie  there  indeed  exercifed  too  great  power,  after  this,  no  place  on 
earth  more  tumultuous  and  unruly  .-  And  yet  no  place  where  the  Bi- 
fliops  were  more  fecular,  and  more  afTumed  the  power  of  the  Sword  : 
But  the  people  chofe  them. 

4.  And  if  it  had  been  true  that  the  choice  lay  only  and  abfolutely 
on  the  Presbyters,  how  came  they  to  have  fo  long  two  Bifhops  and  two 
Churches,  befides  the  Arians  ? 

5.  And  he  wifely  overlooketh  the  Queftion,  who  chofe  thofe  Pref 
byters  that  were  the  chufers  of  the  Bilhop  ? 

J.  22.  He  next  inftanceth,  ex  Eufeb.  /.  6.  ci'io.  in  Get manion  and 
Gerduis  Ordained  by  the  Bifhops  in  NarciflUs  place  at  Hiernfalem. 
Anfw.  1.  His  argument,  if  any,  mull  be  this  ;  Enfibins  faith,  the 

T  2  m- 


(  Ho  ) 

Bifhops  Ordained  them,  not  mentioning  the  peoples  confent  or  choice  :  Ergo, 
their  confent  or  choice  was  not  nfed.  How  eafily  might  he  have  known 
that  we  would  deny  the  confequence?  Doth  any  of  us  deny  that  the 
Bifhops  were  the  Ordainers  of  Bifhops  ?  2.  And  even  the  words  of  £«- 
febins  confute  him,  faying,  That  when  Narciflus  Jhewed  himfelf  Again, 
the  brethren  (no  doubt  the  Laity)  intreated  him  to  enjoy  his  Bijhoprick 
again. 

$.  2  s.HLsnext  inftance  is,  QSeverus  Bifrop  0/Milevis,  in  his  life-time 
appointed  his  fucceffowr,  acquainting  only  the  Clergy  with  it :  And  Auguftine 
prevented  the  peoples  difturbance  and  got  them  to  receive  him^\ 

Anfw.  Thus  it  is  fome  mens  work  to  confute  themfelves.  It's  a 
known  thing  that  the  peoples  right  was  fo  univerfally  and  unquefti- 
onably  acknowledged,  that  the  Canons  forbad  any  Bifhop  to  nomi- 
nate and  chufe  his  Succeflbur,  left  it  fhould  foreftall  rhem  and  preju- 
dice their  choice.  And  why  elfewasthe  peoples  refiftance  feared? 
And  what  did  Attftin  but  perfwade  them  to  confent  ?  And  why  doth 
he  mention  that  the  People  confented  and  received  him,  if  they  had 
no  confenting  Vote,  or  right  on  juft  caufe  to  difTent  ?  It  would  be  an 
odd  argument  to  prove,  that  a  woman  had  no  power  of  choice  in 
Marriage,  becaufe  one  was  put  to  perfwade  her  to  confent  ?  which 
proveth  the  neceffity  of  her  confenting. 

$,  24.  He  next  tells  us  of  Auftinh  own  nomination  of  his  Succeffeur 
Zy-adius. 

Anfw.  More  and  more  againft  himfelf.  All  that  men  do  is  in  dan- 
ger of  mifcarrying  by  their  faultinefs  .-  Wife  men  would  do  their  beft 
to  prevent  this,  and  the  peoples  confent  being  of  neceffity,  they  fbme- 
times  will  pre-engage  them  ;  fo  Austin's  predeceflbur  thought  it  the 
craftieft  way  in  his  life-time,  to  take  in  Auftin  for  his  Coadjutor  or 
fellow  Bifhop  ftwo  in  a  City  J  left  the  people  fhould  mifsof  fo  ex- 
cellent a  man .-  But  this  being  againft  the  Canons,  Anfiin  confefleth 
that  he  did  it  ignorantly,  and  difowneth  it-  Yet  left  the  people  ( who 
grew  more  and  more  faulty)  fhould  mifchufe,  he  in  his  life  time  com- 
mendethtothem£/W/w,  that  their  love  to  him  might  procure  their 
acceptance.  Doth  not  this  prove  that  their  choice  or  confent  was 
necefTary  ?  Reader,  if  the  Doctor  can  perfwade  thee  that  the  Country 
have  not  the  choice  of  Parliament  men,  becaufe  fome  are  commended 
or  named  to  them,  thy  yielding  is  tooeafie. 

§.25.,  The  next  is  the  ftory  oiPadtbe  Novatian.outof  Socrat.l  8. 
(who  hath  but  feven)  Paulus. was  advifing  his  Clergy  to  chufe  his  Suc- 
cejlbur  j  They  tqld  him  their  fear  of, their  own  difagreement,  and  to 

prevent 


(  Hi  ) 

prevent  it,  intreated  him  to  nominate  one.  He  made  them  promife  to 
ftandto  it,  and  named  Mercianus  in  a  fealed  paper.  Dot;i  not  this 
inftance  prove,  that  the  Bifhop  had  not  power  to  chufe  one  of  him- 
felf?  And  was  not  his  fear  of  thedifagreement  of  the  C/ergy  f  And 
doth  any  of  this  difprove  the  peoples  confenting  right?  And  would 
the  Doctor  perfwade  us  that  even  the  Novatians  excluded  them. 

§.  26.  He  tells  us,  that  the  Greeks  Canonifts  thirst  hit  the  Council  of 
Nice  tooh^  away  ail  the  power  of  eleclion  of  Btfiops  from  the  people,  and 
gave  it  to  the  Bijhops  of  the  Province.'} 

Anfw.  i.  In  all  reafon  he  (hould  have  cited  thofe  Canonifts ;  for 
it's  ftrange  that  yet  their  following  Cuftoms  and  Canons  (hould  fay 
the  contrary.  2.  There  is  not  a  word  in  the  Canon  cited  about  electi- 
on, but  only  ordination  [that  all  the  Bifhops  in  the  Province  fliould 
Ordain  a  Bifhop ',  But  when  that  cannot  be,  there  (hall  beat  leaft: 
three  prefent,  and  three  more  confenting  by  writing.]  And  what's 
this  to  the  Cafe  of  the  Peoples  election  or  confent  ? 

§.  27.  Yet  hebringeth  moreagainft  himfelf,  viz..  Can.  18.  Condi 
■  Antioch.  which  is,  That  if  one  be  Ordained  BiJIwp  and  go  not  to  the  Pa^ 
rijh,  bee aufe  the  people  refufehim,  he  Jhall  have  the  honour  and  Office  of  a 
Bifhop,  not  troubling  the  peace  of  the  Church;}  which  plainly  faith 
what  i  have  oft  faid,  That  the  people  have  no  power  to  hinder  any  from 
being  Miniflers  or  Bifiwps  indefinitely  in  the  Church  Vniverfal,  but  only  to 
judge  whether  he  (hall  be  theirs :  whereas  the  Ordainers  have  power 
in  both  cafes  5  and  ufually  were  the  firft  chufers,  though  the  people 
had  a  refufing  or  accepting  power,  as  there  appeared  caufe. 

$.  28.  Next  he  addeth  more  for  what  I  plead,  that  Bafl  Ordain- 
ing one  firft,  yerfwades  the  Senate  and  People  to  accept  him :  Adding 
{Their  way  then  was y  if  the  people  did  agree  on  aperfon  to  be  Bifiop,  to  pe- 
tition the  Metropolitan  and  Synod,  who  had  the  full  power  to  allow  or  re- 
fufe  him."} 

Anfw.  Is  not  this  a  ftrong  proof  that  the  people  had  no  fuch  a- 
greeing  or  chufing  power,  becaufe  the  Metropolitan  and  Synod  alfo 
had  their  vote?  what  need  Bafl  perfwade  them  to  accept  him,  when 
they  had  no  power  to  refufe  ?  Did  Bafl  or  any  Synod  fay,  all  people 
are  bound  to  accept  thofe  whom  we  chufe,  be  they  what  they  will,  and 
not  to  try  them  and  judge  themfelves. 

§.  29.  And  here  I  defire  the  Reader  to  remember,  1.  That  we 
take  the  chief  truft  to  be  by  Chrift  committed  to  the  Ordainers  for 
taking  in  fit  men,and  keeping  out  the  unfit:  They  being  the  only  Judges 
(with  the  perfon  himfelf )  who  fhall  be  a  Mioifterof  Chrift  in  the 

Church 


(  *4*  ) 

Church  Univerfal  ♦,  And  neither  Magiftrate  or  People  have  a  power  to 
chufe  or  refufe  them. 

2.  That  the  Univerfal  Church  being  one  body  of  Chrift,  though 
Minifters  have  not  fuch  a  charge  of  each  others  flocks  as  the  particu- 
lar Biihops  of  them  have,  yet  are  they  bound  to  give  them  all  the  - 
help  they  can  (  as  neighbour  families  to  help  each  other : )  And  there- 
fore to  offer  to  vacant  Churches  the  beft  they  know,  and  perfwade 
them  to  accept  them,  when  they  are  at  a  lofs  or  need  advice. 

3.  The  people  are  bound  to  reverence  the  judgment  of  neighbour 
Paftors  herein,  and  not  cauflefly  tooppofe. 

4.  When  the  People  have  chofen  for  they  and  the  Clergy,)  if  the 
perfon  were  not  before  Ordained,  the  Ordainers  ftill  are  judges  for 
their  own  ad. 

5.  It  was  not  ufual  to  Ordain  fmetitHlo,  and  the  Ordainers  did  two 
things  at  once,  1.  Judge  abfolutely  who  jhall  be  a  Minifter  of  Chrift  ? 
2.  Judge  with  the  Church  to  which  he  was  Ordained  (Elders  and 
People)  who  was  fit  for  that  Church,  and  fhould  be  theirs :  And  a 
threefold  lock  was  fafe. 

6.  By  all  this  it  appears  that  all  the  Dodors  talk  againft  the  peo- 
ples unfitnefs  to  difcern  who  are  found  or  Heretick,  fit  or  unfit,  is 
to  no  purpofe :  And  that  if  unmeet  men  are  Miniftersor  Bifhops,  the 
fault  is  ten  times  more  in  the  Ordainers  than  in  the  People :  feeing  it 
is  not  the  People  but  the  Ordainers  that  are  trufred  to  take  into  the 
Miniftry  indefinitely,  but  only  among  many  to  judg  who  (hall  be  theirs, 
fuppofing  them  either  before  Minifters,  or  next  to  be  made  fuch  by 
the  Ordainers.  And  doth  the  Dodor  think  that  the  judgment  of  all 
parties  is  notas  fure  as  of  one  alone?  or  that  my  refufing  a  Phy- 
fician  is  any  wrong  to  his  Licenfers  or  him  ? 

J.  30.  The  Laodicean  Canon  cited  by  him  fpeaketh  for  me  as  the 
reft:  (Did  he  think  1  wanted  his  help  to  cite  more  for  my  feif  ?)  Who 
doubteth  that  the  People  being  not  the  fole  judges,  if  they  took  in 
an  un-Ordained  or  un-approved  man  without  the  Synods  confent,  it  was 
void?  (  By  the  way,  do  either  Synods  or  People  (theoldchufers)  chufe 
our  Biihops  or  Priefts  ?> 

§.  ft.  Yet  more  for  me,  he  citeth  the  Chalced.  Council,  turning 
out  Bajfianus  and  Stephams  from  Ephejns,  two  men  that  ftrove  and 
fought  for  the  Bifhoprick  unto  blood  in  the  Church,  and  both  plead- 
cd  they  were  lawfully  called  by  Clergy,  and  People,  (And  yet  had  the 
People  no  right?;  But  they  were  both  proved  to  be  violent  Intruders, 
and  another  chofen.  And  who  doubts  but  a  great  General  Council  had 
the greateft  power  then?  §•  32. 


(t*8) 

§.  $2.  Next  he  tells  us  of  a  Law  of  Jufttnian,  that  made  the  Efctt 
jry  and  better  fort  of  Citizen j  chafers-  ("And  indeed  Naz.t4xz.ene  once 
wilht  the  more  religious  fort  were  chufers:  )  but  doth  not  this  prove 
ftill  the  peoples  power,  though  fo  long  after  by  an  Eraperour  the 
poorer  were  fo  reftrained  ?  I  will  not  ftay  to  fearch  the  Book,  but 
take  it  as  he  citeth  it. 

J.  53.  Buthisnexc  feemeth  to  be  downright  againft  us,  Can.  1$. 
Conc.Laodic.  But  it  is  not  fo :  Crab  hath  two  tranilations  :  Thefirft 
faith,  £uodnon  fit  permittendum  turbis  elcftioncs  eorum  facer e  qui  funt  ad 
facer  dot  mm  provebendi  :  It  is  not  fufferable  to  chufe  by  tumults  :  ergo,  net 
for  the  people  to  chufe  at  all,  no  nor  diffent.  I  deny  the  confequence.  To 
forbid  diforder  is  not  to  forbid  choice  or  free  confent. 

$.  34-  His  next  proof  is  Ntc  One  2.  c.  j.  which  he  faith,  reftrain- 
edthe  eUclion  only  to  Biflops. 

Anfw*  Such  dealing  tells  us  that  Protectant  Doctors  are  not  to  be 
taken  for  infallible  no  more  than  Papifts  ',  1  cited  the  Canon  before : 
The  doubt  is  whether  it  drive  us  not  to  more  feparation  than  we  are 
willing  of,  by  nullifying  our  Bifhops  and  Priefts  calling.  It  is  Levery 
iletlion  of  a  Btflop^  Prieft  or  Deacon,  which  is  made  by  Magiftrates,  flail 
remain  void,  by  the  Canon  which  faith,  If  any  Biflop  ufe  the  fecular  Ma- 
giftrates to  obtain  by  them  a  Church,  let  him  be  depofed  and  feparated,  and 
all  that  communicate  with  him.2  Doth  not  the  Doctor  unhappily  chufc 
his  teftimonies  ?  Had  it  not  been  better  to  have  paft  over  this  Council  ? 
Where  now  is  all  the  Church  of  England  by  this  Canon,  if  Bifhops 
coming  in  by  the  King,  and  Parfons  by  the  Patrons  be  all  void  and 
null,  and  the  people  feparated  that  communicate  with  them  ?  Suche- 
vents  are  the  fate  of  an  ill  caufe.  And  the  next  Canon  doth  not  a- 
mend  their  matter,  which  calleth  it  madnefs  for  gain  or  any  afFefti- 
on  of  his  own,  to  drive  any  from  the  Miniftry,  or  figregate  one  of  his  Cler- 
gy, he  flail  have  Lextalionis,  and  his  work^  flail  fa/Ion  his  own  head. 

§.  35.  He  adds,  [_  Which  was  confirmed  by  following  Councils  in  the 
Greek  Church,  as  Can.  28.  Conft.  againft  Photius,  and  the  people  are  there 
excluded  with  an  Anathema,  fo  far  were  popular  elc&ions  grown  out  of 
yequefi  in  the  Eaftern  Empire.'] 

Anfw.  r.  Had  this  been  true,  it  would  not  much  move  me,  that 
thefe  two  Councils  that  fetup  lmageworflip,  and  fhewed  much  wick, 
ednefs,  fhould  contradict  the  ApoftolicalandCatholick  conft  i  tut  ions 
and  practice.  But,  1 .  1  thank  the  Bifhops,  I  am  not  able  to  buy 
the  French  Volumes  of  the  Councils,  and  therefore  what  is  there  I 
know  not :  and  my  own  Library  is  rtined  to  avoid  their  Agents  di- 
straining 


(  144  ) 


(training  it  for  my  Preaching.-  And  Dottor  James  and  others  have 
taught  me  to  prefer  the  oldeft  Editions  of  the  Councils,  and  to  take 
heed  how  I  truft  the  later  and  the  Jefuits  pretended  Manufcripts.  1 
have  now  none  but  Crab  (who  medlethnot  with  this)  ia\&Binnius\ 
And  in  Binnius  there  are  but  14  Canons  in  the  laft  Action,  and  27  in 
the  antecedent  Fragment* :  and  no  fuch  thing  as  a  28/^?  Canon  to  be 
found:  Nor  is  there  in  the  27^  any  fuch  thing  as  the  Doctor  ci- 
teth. 

2.  But  if  there  were,  if  it  were  but  the  confirmation  of  the  2.  Ni- 
cene  Canon,  it  were  much  againft  the  Doctor's  caufe,  and  nothing  for 
him. 

3.  But  unhappily  here  alfo  he  fends  us  to  find  out  much  againft 
him.  For  befides  that  the  %th  Can.  in  Fragm.  condemneth  requiring 
fubfcriptions  to  ftick  to  the  Patriarch  (chough  they  were  not  yet 
oaths  of  obedience  J  the  12th  Canon  is  indeed  the  fame  with  thofe 
forecited,  *&.  "That  the  Apoftolical  and  Synodical  Canons  flatly 
u  forbidding  promotions  and  confecrations  of  Bifhops,  by  the  power 
u  and  command  of  Princes,  we  concordantly  define,  and  fentence, 
ct  that  if  any  Bifhop  receive  the  confecration  of  fuch  a  dignity,  by 
u  the  craft  and  tyranny  of  Princes,  he  (hall  be  altogether  depofed,  as 
u  one  that  defired  and  confented  to  have  the  gift  of  God  by  the  will 
4C  of  carnal  fenfe,  and  from  men  and  by  men. 

I  fuppofe  this  is  the  Doctors  Canon  which  depofeth  all  the  Englijh 
Bifhops,  unhappily  cited.  And  the  Can.  14.  requiring  Princesto  ho- 
nour Bifhops,  and  condemning  the  Bifhops  that  debafe  themfelves  to 
go  far  from  their  Church  to  meet  a  Prince,  and  that  will  alight  to 
them  from  their  Horfes,  and  that  will  bafely  kneel  to  them,  or  will 
come  to  their  tables,  ur.lefs  with  purpofe  freely  to  reprove  them] 
expoundeth  both  thefe  Bifhops  hearts  and  words.  And  fo  doth  Can. 
17.  which  condemneth  fuch  as  come  not  to  Synods  becaufethe  Prince 
forbiddeth  them,  and  faith,  That  Princes  have  no  right  Jo  much  as  to.be 
ffctlators  of  the  matters  which  at  Synods  fall  out  among  Pnefts.  And 
here  indeed  an  Anathema  is  pronounced  againft  the  obflinately  diC 
obedient  Bifhops>  that  will  not  obey  their  Patriarch  before  theforbid- 
dingTrince7\  And  doth  this  meddle  with  the  peoples  Recipient  pow- 
er i  which  is  only  levelled  againft  Princes  and  Lay  Patrons  Impofiti- 
ons,  and  depofeth  the  Englifh Clergy  and  Church  ? 

The  fame  is  repeated,  Can.  25.  (which  it's  likely  is  that  which  he 
meant)  viz*  u  That  according  to  the  old  Canons  the  promotions 
tC  and  confecrations  of  Bifhops  be  made  by  the  choice  and  decree  of 

the 


(  '45  ) 

ct  the  ^College,  and  that  no  Lay  Princes  or  men  in  power  tfmmstm) 
"  do  mix  themfelves  in  the  electioneer  promotion  of  Patriarchs,  Me- 
tropolitans, or  any  Bifhop  ^  left  hence  there  be  inordinate  confu- 
"fionor  contention,  fpeciaily  feeing  that  it  is  net  convenient  thai: 
"any  Potentates  or  other  Lay-men   have  pewer  in  fnch  matters, 

44  but  rather  attend  with  fllence. And  if  any  llcular  Prince  or 

"Potentate  (men  in  power)  or  Laymen  of  other  dignity,  ftrivt 
lt  againft  the  common  and  confonant  and  Canonical  Election  of  the 
"Ecclefiaftical  Order,  let  him  be  anathema,  till  he  confent  and  obey 
"  in  this,  which  the  Church  fhall  (hew  its  will  in,  in  the  Election  and 
"Ordination  of  its  Proper  Bifhops. 

Here,  I.  The  Churches  will  is  made  the  determiner  of  the  Ele- 
ction and  Ordination  of  their  proper  Bifhop.  2.  The  Canonical 
Order  is  eftablifhed  (which  ever  required  the  Clergies  and  Peoples 
confent.)  3.  Nothing  of  the  Laity  but  acts  of  Princes  power  and  dig- 
nity is  excluded :  4.  And  hereby  our  Englijh  Clergy  depofed.  The 
Doctor  had  been  better  to  have  let  alone  his  Hiftory  and  AntU 
quities. 

J.  36.  His4fi>  note  is,  Chriftian  Magiftrates  did  interpofe  in  this  mat- 
ter as  they  judged  expedient. 

jinfw.  Hitherto  he  hath  produced  the  Teftimonies  of  Councils 
and  Bifhops  againft  Magiftrates  choice  ormediings(miftakingly  think- 
ing it  had  been  againft  the  Flocks  Receptive  powerj  And  now  he 
will  prove  that  Magiftrates  interpofed,  as  you  fhall  hear. 

§.  3  7-  Andfirft  [So  Conftantine  did  in  the  Church  of  Antioch.  Soz. 
I.  i.e.  19. 

j4nfw.  What  did  he  ?  He  motioned  a  Bifhop  to  end  the  difference-, 
And  who  oppofeth  that  ? 

§.  38.  Next  [Conftantitu  put  by  two  that  the  people ftrovc  about, 
and  fet  up  Eufeb.  Nicom. 

jlnfvr.  An  unhappy  teftimony  :  Socrates  whom  he  citeth  thus  rela- 
teth  it,  [Alexander  dying  commended  Paulus  to  thethufers  as  the  fitreft, 
but  if  they  muldhave  a  man  offrowefs  to  chafe  Macedonius.*]  The  people 
were  divided  in  the  choice,  and  made  a  greater  ftir  than  formerly  1 
But  the  Orthodox  carried  it  for  Paulus  againft  the  Hereticks  that 
were  for  Macedonius.  Conftantius  being  the  firft  perfecuting  Arian 
Emperour,  was  offended,  and  got  a  Council  to  depofe  Paulus,  and 
he  got  in  his  great  favourite  Eufebius  Ntcomed.  the  head  of  all  the  A- 
rians.  Doth  not  this  fhew,  1.  That  the  people  were  chufers,  2.  That 
the  Emperour  depofed  him  not,  but  by  a  packt  Council  of  Bifhops 

U  (which 


(  *¥  ) 

£which  we  know  had  a  depofing  power?)  3 .  That  this  is  Recorded  as 
an  Acl:  of  two  Hereticks,  a  Prince  and  Prelate,  wronging  the 
Church. 

§.  39.  Saith  he,  [XVhen  Eufebius  was  dead,  the  Orthodox  party  again 
chofe  Paulus,  and  Conftantius  fends  Hermogenes  to  drive  him  out  by 
force. 

Anfw.  i.I  doubt  he  will  next  cite  Valens,  Genf ericas  ^Hnnner  km  ><&c 
for  murdering  and  perfecting  the  Bifhops.  Was  an  Arians  Tyranny, 
a  note  of  right? 

2.  The  ftory  (in  Socrates  cited  by  him)  is  this  :  Eufeb.  the  Arian 
being  dead,  the  People  again  went  to  the  choice,  and  chofe  as  before : 
But  fome  were  kiliM  in  the  tumult.  The  Arian  Emperour  fends  Her- 
mogenes to  force  out  Taulus  the  chofen  Bifhop  .♦  The  people  tumuitu- 
oufly  fight  for  their  Biihop  and  priviledge,  and  fet  Hermogenes  Lodg- 
ings on  fire  and  kill  him.  The  Emperour  comes  from  Anticch,  a- 
merceth  the  City,  and  puts  Tad  out,  and  yet  is  angry  that  Macedo- 
nia was  chofen  by  the  other  part  without  his  advice;,  but  con  fen  tech 
to  him. 

1.  Doth  notthisfhew  that  the  people  were  the  chufers  ?  2.  And 
even  their  murderous  tumult  moved  neither  an  Heretick  Prince  nor 
the  Bifhops  to  deny  their  right  of  choice.  3.  Murder  and  fuch  vio- 
lence was  a  fair  colour  for  more  feverity.  4.  Yet  all  this  was  by  a 
Heretick  noted  as  an  ad  againft  the  Church.  5.  And  all  this  was 
but  about  a  Patriarch,  and  not  an  ordinary  Biihop,  and  that  at  his 
Imperial  feat,  where  it  concerned  the  Emperour s  to  have  moft  re- 
gard. 6.  And  I  told  you  that  Princes  are  the  Judges  whom  thqy 
fhould  tolerate,  whoever  have  the  choice. . 

§.  40.  He  adds,  When  Athanafius  was  reflored,  Conftantius  decla- 
red it  was  by  the  decree  of  the  Synod  and  by  his  confent. 

Anfw.  1.  If  he  meant  here  to  intimate  the  exclufion  of  the  peoples 
confent  or  choice,  he  could  fcarce  have  named  in  Hiftory  an  inftance 
more  againft  himfelf,  than  that  of  Athanafius,  who  thereby  was 
brought  in,  upheld  and  oft  reftored.  2.  This  Hiftory  tells  you  the 
Arian  Emperour  was  forced  to  this  confent,  to  avoid  a  threatned  War 
from  his  brother.  3.  This  was  not  to  make  him  Bifhop,  but  tocall 
him  to  his  flock  from  his  banifhment.  4.  And  dothnot  all  this  confirm 
what  I  plead  for,  as, to  the  Peoples,  Synods  and  Princes  feveral 
parts  ? 

§;  41.  NeEtarius cafe  is  next,  about  whom  Hifiorians  difagree,  but 
the  moft  credible  fay>  that  the. Council  named  Nettarw  with  fome 

others 


(  H7  ) 

others  in  a  paper,  and  in  honour  to  an  excellent  Emperour,  bid 
him  take  which  he  would  :  But  all  this  excluded  not  the  peoples  pare 
(who  would  not  have  left  Gregory  but  by  his  own  requelt)  and  were 
glad  to  accept  one  from  fucha  Council  and  Prince. 

§.  42.  Next  he  faith  out  of  Soumen,  That  the  People  and  Clergy 
chofe  Chryfoftome,  and  Arcadius  confented\  and  then  he  affronted! 
Sozomen  with  PalUdins. 

Anfw.  i.  Palladms  denyeth  nothing  that  I  plead  for,  but  only  tells 
us  of  the  Emperours  premotion  and  endeavours,  (in  his  Royal  City 
about  a  Patriarch)  to  prevent  the  divifion  of  the  people  :  Nor  hPal- 
Udius  credit  to  be  equalled  to  Sozomen^s  herein,  much  lefs  prefer- 
red.    2.  Socrates   the  moft  credible  of  all   in  this,   faith,  /.  6.  c.  2. 

[It  f e erne d good  to  them  to  fend  for  John  Chryf Wherefore   not  long 

after,  Arcadius  with  the  general  confent  both  of  Priefts  and  People  fent 
forhim.2  And  did  not  tne  Doctor  think  1  needed  help  by  fuch  Ci- 
tations? 

$.45.  The  choice  of  Neftorins  was  juftfuch  another.  The  people 
had  no  reafon  to  deny  confent  to  one  out  of  ChryfoftonPs  Monaste- 
ry, nominated  by  fo  good  an  Emperour',  who  was  judge  whom  to 
tolerate  in  his  Royal  City :  But  both  he  and  they  after  repented  of 
the  choice. 

§.  44.  His  laft  inftance  is  Theodofins  getting  in  Proclns  before  Maxi- 
mianus  was  buried. 

Anfw.  Reader,  1.  All  this  is  a  good  Emperours  care  about  one 
Patriarch  of  his  own  City  to  avoid  divifion,  and  nothing  to  the  com- 
mon choice  of  Bifhops. 

2.  The  true  cafe  Socrates  (  cited )  thus  defcribeth :  The  people 
were  the  chufers:  They  were  for  Proclns ;  but  fome  ad verfaries  ob- 
jected a  Canon,  that  a  Bifhop  might  not  be  removed  from  one  Church 
to  another,  and  he  being  a  Bifhop  already  they  could  not  have  him  : 
Socrates  pleadeth  for  the  difpenfablenefs  of  this  Canon  \  but  the 
people  were  fain  to  take  Maximiamis.  The  Emperour  being  for  dit 
penfing  with  that  Canon,  and  gratifying  the  people  that  had  before 
declared  themfelves  for  Proclns,  did  not  himfelf  bring  him  in,  but 
got  Celeftine  Bifhop  of  Rome  to  write  to  Cyril  of  Alex anid.  John  Bifhop 
oiAntioch  and  Rnfns  Bifhop  of  Thejfalonka  to  fatisfie  them  to  do  it  •,  and 
fo  got  Proclns  in.  What  is  this  againft  the  peoples  right  ?  Thefe  be 
all  the  Doctor's  inftances  on  this  point. 

$.  45-  His  5fJ?note  is,  [On  the  alteration  of  the  Government  of  Chri- 
ftendom  there  was  greater  reafon  for  the  Maaiftrates  interpofmg  than  be- 

U   2  fore: 


(  i4»  ) 

fire:  Becaufe  of  Princes  endowing  Churches,  the  Royal  affetit  was pt% — 
though  a  Biflwp  was  chofen  by  the  Clergy  and  People^ 

Anfw.  Who  would  ftnve  againft  fo  friendly  a  difputer,  that  go- 
eth  on  to  fay  die  fame  as  I  ?  when  I  doubt  his  party  will  fay  that 
he  Prevaricateth. 

$,  46.  But  he  faith,  The  Royal  power  overthrowing  the  Papal ,  refer- 
ved  the  power  of  nomination  of  Bifoops  as  part  of  the    Prerogative  :  which 
being  allowed  in  frequent  Parliaments,  the  confent  of  the  people  u  {wallow- 
ed up  therein y  fince  their  Atls  oblige  the  whole  Nation. 

Anfw.   1.  1  fee  we  yet  underftand  not  how  much  o f  the  Irenicon  is, 
retraced,  and  whether  he  yet  hold  not  that  no  Form  of  Church-Go- 
vernment is  of  Divine  Institution ;  or  we  be  not  bound  to  be  for  that 
which  King  and  Parliament  are  for.    But  we  undertake  to  prove  the. 
contrary,  and  have  done  it. 

2. .  What  if  Parliaments  gave  the  King  power  to  chufe  all  Folks 
Wives  and  Husbands,  Phyficians,  Tutors,  Diet,  Trade,  &c.  our  Right 
were  not  fwailowed  up  by  this,  though  it  were  called  tbe  King's 
Prerogative.  Much  lefs  where  Gods  lnftitution  and  the  very  Law 
of  Nature  have  foreftalled  them,  and  neither .  God  nor  Man.  gave, 
them  that  fwallowing  power. 

3.  I  oft  anfwered,  thatTythes  and  Temples  may  be  more  in  the. 
Magiftrates  power,  than  Paftoral  relation  and  power  of  the  Keys. 

$.  47.  He  faith,  p.  $26.  That  the  inferiour  right  of  Patronage  is juftly, 
thought  to^  bear  <qual  date  with  the  fettlement  of  Chrifiianity  in  peace  and 
quietnefs. 

Anfw.  1.  It  was  fcarce  ever  fetled  in  peace  and  quietnefs  to  this, 
day :  Much  lefs  during  the  Saxons  Heptarchy.  2.  I  have  proved  that 
the  Univerfal  Church  was  far  from  making  Lay  Patrons  thechufers. 
3.  It  is  lefs  lawful  to  fell  our  Souls  into  flavery  than  our  bodies : 
And  if  our  Anceftors  had  faid  tofome  rich  men,  YoufhaU  all  chufe  our 
Paftors  and  we  will  ft  and  to  your  choice,  if  you  will  build  us  Temples  and 
give  them  Lands  *,  it  would  no  more  bind  us  to  ftand  to  their  bargain, 
than  if  they  had  faid,  Give  usHoufe  and  Land, .  and  you  fhall  chufe  our 
Diet,  Wives,  Phyficians,  &c  we  fay  if  your  kindnefs  be  turned  to 
our  hurt,  take  your  houfe  and  land)  or  give  it  to  whom  you  will :  we 
mil  not  fell  our  fouls  and  Church-rights  at  fuch  a  price* 

§,..  48.  His  6//j  conclufion  is,  That  things  being  thus  fetled — there  is 
vo  ground  for  the  people  to  refiitne  the  liberty  of  Elections. 

Anfw-  1.  1  need  not  over  and  over  repeat  the  anfwer  to  his  rea- 
fons.  2.  If  the  liberty  of  Eltftim  be  not  refumed  fwhich  was  not 

that 


(H9) 

that  which  I  pleaded  for,  as  he  would  all  along  inflauate,)  yet  the  li- 
berty of  free  confent  or  refufal  may  be  neceflary. 

§.  49.  Reader,  again,  the  true  cafe  is  like  this  following:  Parents- 
have  a  ruling  power  to  chufe  Wives  and  Husbands  for  their 
Children:  Guardians  have  much  power  over  Orphans  in  it.     «=13 
Magiftrates  may  make  Laws  to  reftrain  unlawful  Marriages. 
Children  are  bound  inthefe  cafes  to  obey  Parents,  unlefs  they  chufe 
to  their  apparent  hurt  or  danger*,   and  to  obey  Guardians  and  Ma- 
giftrates in  their  proper  Laws.     But  1.  It  is  for  all  this  no  Marriage 
till  both  parties  confent.  2.    And  ail  the  faid  power  over  them  is  li- 
mited, and  but  directive  and  not  deftruttive  to  their  own  confent- 
ing  power. 

Even  foin  our  cafe  ^  n  The  Ordainers  are  the  firft  Judges,  and 
have  a  power  like  Parents,  and  none  fhould  be  received  agamft  their 
wills,  unlefs  they  would  betray  the  Church.  2.  Tne  Magiftrates  may 
make  ordering  reftrainingLaws,  that  no  unworthy  perfon  (hall  be  to- 
lerated :  3.  Alimited  power  of  nomination  may  be  left  to  Patrons, 
as  Guardians,  who  have  power  to  help  the  Churches,  but  none  to 
hurt*,  much  iefs  to  ruinc  them  4.  But  it  is  not  a  Church  related  as 
Paftor  and  Flock,  till  both  confent.  Thefe  things  are  evident  truth, 
though  fome  would  bury  it  in  a  heap  of  words. 

$.  50.  I  would  alfo  if  I  could  have  drawn  the  Doctor  to  refolve 
me  this  doubt  ',  Whether  the  power  of  Parents  and  Husbands,  or  ej Patrons , 
yea  or  Princes  be  greater,  in  the  choice  of  Food ,  Phyfick^  and  fo  of  a  Tu- 
tor, a  Paftor  or  a  particular  Church- Communion.  And  if  a  Parent  or  Huf~ 
band  fay,  I  command  you  to  hear  and  Communicate  with  fuch  a  Pa- 
ftor and  Congregation,  and  the  Patron  fay  the  contrary,  yea,  or 
the  Prince  or  Law,  which  is  to  be  obeyed  ?  A  nd  to  whom  this  Family 
Government  moft  belongeth  ?  And  why  Father  and  Mother  rather 
than  Prince  and  Priefts  are  named  in  the  Fifth-Commandment  ? 

§.  J 1-  p-  529.  He  reciteth  my  reafons,  why  Parliaments  cannot 
take  away  our  free  Receptive  confent,  and  he  again  feigneth  that  I 
fay  all  this  for  the  peoples  chafing  power,  yet  confefTeth  I  deny  not 
the  Magiftrates  or  Patrons  power  of  their  own  Gift.  (The  Cafe  of 
Sacrilege  I  leave  to  their  Confciences.) 

§.  52.  p.  no.  But  faith  he,  Anabaptijts,  Quakers,  and  all  may pre- 
tend a  care  of  their  Souls,  and  fo  leave  the  Minifter  only  the  Temple  and 
Tythes. 

Anjw.  i.  kxAAnahaptifts  and  Quakers  will  have  a  care  of  their 
Souls,  when  you  have  faid  and  done  all  you  can  againft  it :  Aprifon 
will  not  overcome  it.-  2.  So 


(i5o) 

-  2.  So  Turks*  Socimans,  Papifts,  (or  Anabaptifls  if  you  will)  when  they 
get  into  power,  may  pretend  that  they  are  fitter  to  be  traded  with 
mens  Souls,  than  men  with  their  own;  And  fo  Prelates  may  fay  :  But 
is  nothing  true  that  men  can  abufe  and  mifapply  ? 

And  to  me  it  is  fomething,  though  it  fliould  be  nothing  to  you, 
i.  That  nature  obligeth  and  difpofeth  every  man  more  to  care  for  his 
own  foul,  than  it  doth  the  Patron  to  care  for  others.  2.  That  many 
hundred  or  thoufand  men  are  not  all  fo  like  to  miftake  and  mifcar- 
ry  about  their  own  Souls,  as  one  Patron  is  that  is  far  from  their 
hearts.  3.  That  it  is  a  matter  more  dangerous  to  truft  thoufands  in  one 
hand  than  in  many  fas  it  would  be  in  a  ftorm  to  put  all  into  one  boat.) 
If  that  man  mifcarry  he  endangereth  multitudes :  If  another  manmif- 
carry  it  is  but  for  one. 

3.  To  have  a  felf-faving  power,  and  to  have  a  felf-deftroying 
power,  differ  (with  men  that  hate  not  diftin&ion.)  So  little  can  a 
man  know  what  we  fay  by  this  Doctors  Aniwers,  that  a  (hanger 
would  think  by  him  that  we  were  quite  of  another  mind.  I  never 
faid  Quakers  or  any  others  may  have  whom  they  will :  If  they  chufe 
men  uncapable,  the  neighbour  Bifhops  or  the  Clergy  mayadmonifh 
them,  and  renounce  his  Communion",  And  the  Magiftrate  may  re- 
ftrain  him  and  refufe  to  tolerate  an  intolerable  mart:  And  yet  the 
people  ought  not;  to  accept  an  uncapable  man  offered  by  Bifhops 
or  Patrons*,  no  nor  a  man  next  to  uncapable  when  they  need  and  may 
have  much  better.  Many  Negatives  are  fafe. 

§.  53.  He  faith,  The  prophane  have  right  to  their  own  fouls,  and  to 
the  care  of  themr  and  therefore  are  equally  concerned  with  others  fto 
chufe.J 

Anfw.  It  is  fad  with  the  Church  when  they  need  to  be  faved  from 
fuch  reafonings  of  their  great  Teachers. 

1.  A  Right  to  care  for  their  Souls  giveth  no  man  right  to  chufe 
men  for  others  Soul?,  to  do  that  which  they  will  not  have  done  for 
their  own.  The  queftion  is,  whether  that  man  will  Communicate  with 
the  Church  on  Chrifts  terms  ?  He  refufeth  and  will  not  (elfe  he  ought 
not  to  be  refufed.)  And  ihall  he  that  refufeth  Communion  chufe  one  to 
give  it  others,  becaufe  he  hath  a  Soulhimfelf?  Had  the  neighbour 
Heathens  and  Hereticks  of  old  power  to  chufe  Bifhops  for  the 
Church,  while  they  refufed  to  be  of  the  Church  themfeives  >  Shall 
he  that  will  not  be  of  the  Society  chufe  for  the  Society  ? 

2.  We  diftinguifh  between  what  a  man  may  be  forced  to,  and  what 
*ot.    He  may  not  be  forced  to  the  great  gift  of  Sacramental  Remif- 

fion 


C*sO 

fion  and  Communion,rx-caufe  no  unwilling  perfon  hath  right  to  it ;  But 
an  ignorant  perfon  may  be  forced  as  ^Catechumen  or  hearer^to  hear  what 
can  be  faid  for  his  conviction :  For  truth  may  conquer  the  unwilling. 
But  none  on  this  pretenfe  can  hinder  the  Church  from  hearing  its 
own  Paftors,  nor  force  men  to  be  the  ordinary  Auditors  of  Maho- 
metans, Hereticks  or  Heathens. 

§.  54.  p.  331.  He  again  tragically  exclaims  of  me,  on  the  old 
falfe  fuppoficion,  that  I  make  the  people  the  fole  chufers,  and  noc 
only  plead  for  their  free  Negative  Vote  (though  chufing  alfo,  but  not 
alone,  was  the  old  way^)  And  here  tells  us  of  the  tumults  that 
would  follow. 

Anfw*  1.  So  they  would  if  the  people  chofe  in  France,  Spain,  [- 
taly:  And  yet  I  would  they  did.  Nohurnane  aftions  are  free  from 
inconveniencies  ',  which  are  not  to  be  cured  with  amifchkf. 

2.  Let  him  name  me  ten  places  that  have  fuffered  fo  deeply  by  the 
peoples  choice,  as  I  can  tell  him  of  ten  thoufand  that  have  done  by 
the  choice  of  Prelates,  Patrons  and  Princes,  and  I  will  confefs  my 
errour.  It  was  not  by  the  peoples  choice  that  all  preaching  was  put 
down  in  Mofcovy .-  It  is  not  the  people  that  have  this  many  hundred 
years  chofen  all  the  Popifh  Bifhops,  iMafs-priefts,  &c  in  Italy,  and 
moft  of  the  Roman  Church,  even  in  Spain,  France,  Bavaria,  &c. 

3.  I  told  him,  but  had  no  anfwer,  that  not  only  the  Innes  of 
Court,  but  alfo  Black } ry art,  J  Iderwan  bury  yznd  fuch  other  places  as  have 
ehofen  their  own  Teachers,  have  f  peaceably  J  had  as  happy  a  fuccef- 
fion  of  Learned,  Godly,  able  Pallors,  as  any  place  in  London  or  in 
England. 

4.  It's  known  by  experience  that  Learning  and  great  worth  doth 
as  Light  fo  reveal  it  felf  to  humane  nature,  that  ufually  moft  of  thofe 
that  are  loth  to  be  holy  themfelves,  would  have  a  Saint  and  an  able 
man. 

5.  Doth  he  think  in  his  Confcience  that  all  the  Patrons  in  England 
are  liker  to  be  judicious,  and  free  from  felicitations,  favour  and 
refpect  of  perfons,  than  the  majority  of  the  Communicants  of  fuch 
Churches  ? 

6.  If  the  Parfons  firfb  admit  great  numbers  of  profane,  and  wick- 
ed men  to  be  Communicants,  and  then  tell  us  how  unfit  thefe  men 
aretochufe.*  they  do  but  condemn  themfelves. 

§•  55-  p*  111*  He  tells  us  we  do  but  fay,  We  judge,  we  thinly,  &c. 
the  things  unlawful,  but  for  partkukr  arguments  to  prove  them  unlawful, 
he  finds  none* 


Anfa.  If  this  be  true,  then  they  that  never  found  our  arguments 
never  anfwered  them.  (If  it  be  not  true,  it  is  not  well.)  Then  you 
here,  and  Mr.  Falkener^  Fulxvood^  Durd%  &c.  have  not  yet  anfwered 
any  of  our  arguments.  Remember  this. 

2.  Though  I  did  not  argue,  but  name  the  things  in  my'firft  Plea, 
you  and  others  took  it  for  arguing  ^  and  we  ever  craved  leave  to 
doit. 

3.  Is  it  true  indeed,  that  there  are  no  arguments,  in  our  Wri- 
tings, 1 660.  and  166 1.  with  the  Bifhops,  nor  any  in  my  Book  of 
Concord,  orTreatifeofEpifcopacy,  nor  in  my  old  Difputations  of 
Church-Government ,  nor  in  any  other  mens  Books  thefe  eighteen 
years  ?  I  doubt  the  angry  Bifhops  will  think  that  in  my  Treatife 
of  Epifcopacy  there  is  fome  fort  of  Argument^  and  that  my  Book 
againft  Sacril.  Defertion  of  the  Miniftry  hath  fome :  and  that  an  A- 
pology  for  our  preaching  (  now  in  the  Prefs)  hath  fome.  But  if 
the  re  be  none,  accufe  us  of  none* 


CHAP. 


( *si ; 

CHAR    X. 

Of  the  Impofed  ufe  of  the  Crofs  in  Baptifm,  and  de- 
nying Baptifm  to  the  refufers. 

$.  i.l)Age  348.  He  comcth  to  our  {charge  againft  the  Church] 
JL    ( chough  he  never  found  any  Arguments  as  aforefaid.) 

And  I.  Why  doth  he  filently  balk  the  chief  things  which  I  had 
named?  will  this  fatisfie  Confidence  ?  will  excufing  fome  things  make 
others  lawful  ? 

II-  As  to  what  he  faith  for  the  Crofs,  I  have  fo  fully  anfwejed  it 
twice  to  Mr.  Cheney,  and  once  to  the  Impleader,  that  I  am  loth  to  re- 
peat all  again.  In  fhort,  1.  He  faith  the  Church  intends  it  not  {for 
a  fign  of  Immediate  dedication."} 

Anfw.  1 .  What  is  the  Medium  i  2.  What  if  it  were  not  Immediate  ? 
3.  Can  it  be  more  Immediate  than  in  the  very  prefent  dedicating  a&, 
to  ufe  the  fign  and  exprefling  the  dedicating  fignification  ? —  4.  The 
words  of  the  Canon  a;te,  [To  dedicate  them  by  that  badge  to  his  fervice, 
whofe  benefits  beftowed  on  them  in  baptifm  the  name  of  the  Crofs  doth  refre- 
fent.]  And  after  {the  Church  of  England  accounteth  it  an  honourable 
badge  whereby  the  Infant  is  dedicated  to  the  fervice  of  him  that  dyed  on 
the  Crofs."]  And  the  fervice  is  named  QChriftianity  in  practice,]  to 
fight  under  his  banner,  &c. 

2.  He  faith,  {In  baptizing  the  Minifler  ails  by  Authority  derived  from 
Chrift,  but  at  Croffmg  he  fpeaks  in  the  name  of  the  Church,  [We  receive 
this  Child,  &c] 

Anfw.  1.  It's  meet  it  fhould  be  fo,thatChrift's  Sacraments  be  ufedby 
Chri  It's  Authority,  and  mens  by  mens. 

2.  But  I  hope  this  is  but  a  quibble*,  and  that  notwithftanding  the 
word  {we,]  the  Minifter  as  Chrift's  Minifter,  and  in  his  name  faith, 
{we  receive  this  child,]  when  even  the  abfolved  are  to  be  received  by 
Chrifi:  firft,  and  then  by  the  Church.  I  will  not  elfe  aggravate  the 
ill  confequences. 

$.  2.  He  before  faith,  {Was  the  Crofs  a  dedicating  fign  to  Cod,  or 
rf  declarative  fign  to  men  ?] 

Anfw-  The  Canon  faith  exprefly  twice,  QTo  dedicate  them  by  this 
badge  to  his  fervice—]  And  Can  honourable  badge  whereby  the  In- 

X  ~  fant 


C  154  ) 

fane  is  dedicated  to  his  Service.]  And  the  Rubrick  which  we  muft 
fubferibe,  refers  us  to  the  Canon  for  the  true  fenfe  and  reafon  of  the 
Croffing. 

2,  Is  Baptifm  and  the  Lords  Suffer  a  fign  to  God,  or  to  man  ?  It  is  a 
fignto  man  for  God  .-  Godknoweth  notbyfigns,  but  inftiruteth  figns- 
for  humane  ufe.  It  is  to  dedicate  them  to  God's  fervice. 
$.  3.  He  faith,  [It  reprcfents  the  duty  and  not  the  Grace'} 
Anfw.  1.  The  words  are,  [to  his  fervice,  whofe  benefits  b  eft  owed  on 
them  in  baptifm,  the  name  of  the  Crofs  doth  reprefent.}  Are  the  benefits 
fobeftowed  no  Grace?  or  is  Reprefenting  no  Reprefenting  ?  orfhali 
we  believe  the  Doctor  againft  the  Church  ?  or  is  this  the  kind  of 
Conformity  that  he  would  teach  us,  by  denying  what  we  fubferibe 
to? 

2.  Sure  the  Crofs  of  Chrift  with  his  dying  on  it,  expreft  alfo  in  the 
words  of  the  Canon,  is  Grace.  To  repreientor  fignifie  Chrift-  dying  on 
the  Crofs  ( which  are  the  words  and  ufe)  is  immediately  to  repreient  or 
fignifie  the  very  Grace  of  Redemption  it  felf. 

3.  To  be  lifted  under  Chrift  as  the  Captain  of  our  Salvation,  and 
to  be  received  into  the  Congregation  of  Chrifts  flock,  to  fight  un- 
der his  banner,  &c  are  all  great  Grace. 

4.  The  moral  operation  on  the  foul  which  the- preface  of  the  Li- 
turgy afcribes  to  the  Ceremonies,  is  Grace  ro  be*wrought  By  them. 

5.  To  make  a  common  fymbol  or  badge  of  Chriftianity,  folemn- 
ly  obliging  as  a  Covenanting  fign,  by  which  they  muft  be  diftinguifh- 
ed  from  Infidels,  and  this  even  at  our  fir  ft  Covenanting  with  Chrift:, 
is  to  make  a  Sacrament  in  the  old  fence.  What  was  the  Souldiers 
Sacramentum  Militare  more,  from  which  the  Church  feems  to  have 
borrowed  the  name?  The  Oath  was  obliging  ',  The  colours  or  c/h- 
gtdum  was  obliging  and  a  fignifying  badge .-  The  good  received  was 
the  honour,  relation  and  hope  of  future  pay  or  preferment  upon  per- 
formance.   And  is  not  all  this  in  ours? 

6.  If  you  have  wit  ftrong  enough  to  juftifie  all  this  humane  addi- 
tion to  Chrifts  great  inftitution,  muft  all  men  be  compelled  to  pra- 
ftifeas  you  and  fuch  others  judge,  becaufe  you  think  they  do  not 
confute  you?  Who  gave  you  or  fuch  others  right  to  filence,  reject 
from  Chriftendom,  &c.  all  fuch  as  are  not  herein  of  <your  mind  j 
even  when  you  deny  what  your  Canon  exprefly  faith  ? 

§.4.  He  faith,  It  addeth  nothing  to  Bsptifm  which  is  compleat  be- 
fore. * 

Anfw.  What's  this  to  our  queftion  f  It  adds  another  Sacrament  to 

Baptifm  z 


(  isO 

Baptifm:  The  Lords  Supper  is  another  Sacrament  of  the  fame  Co- 
venant added  to  perftd  Baptifm  by  Chrift;  and  the  Crofs  by 
men. 

§.  5.  But  all  the  difficulty  is  thus  removed  •( he  thinks)  and  by 
the  forefaid  quibble  of  [I  baptize']  and  [we  receiver] 

Arfw.  Difficulties  are  eafilier  removed  with  fome  men,  than  with 
others. 

1.  He  dare  not  fay  that  the  Minifter  fpeaks  not  as  from  Chrift, 
when-ever  he  faith  [we]  in  the  plural  number. 

2.  Doubtlefsitis  firft  Chrifts  aft,  and  then  the  Churches  to  Receive 
the  Baptized  into  the  fioch^of Chrift  :  And  the  Minifter  herein  firft  fpeak- 
eth  Chrills  aft  and  then  the  Churches. 

$.  The  words  [we  receive]  him,  goeth  before  the  Crofting  and  is 
named  efpecially  as  part  of  the  Miniftration  of  Baptifm,  being  its 
immediate  effe&.  And  what  a  dangerous  invention  is  it  to  fay  than 
the  Minifter  here  fpeaketh'not  from  Chrift  but  the  Church,  in  re- 
ceiving in  thofe  dedicated  to  him  ? 

4.  And  he  will  make  us  a  hard  task  of  it,  to  know  when  the 
Prieft  fpeaks  as  God's  Minifter,  and  when  as  the  peoples  Minifter  or 
mouth  ? 

§.  6.  He  brings  us  the  inftance  of  one  after  B^ti[my  engaging 
himfelf  in  the  Independent  Church  Covenant  by  holding  up  his  hand. 

Jnfw.  1.  It  is  fuppofed  that  the  Covenant  which  he  mentioneth 
is  not  the  Covenant  of  Chriftianity,  but  (that  fuppofed)  aconfent  or 
promife  to  live  in  the  relation  and  duty  of  a  Chriftian  member  of 
that  particular  flock.  And  this  is  much  like  a  Covenant  between  a 
Chriftian  Man  and  Wife,  Tutor  and  Pupil  .•  And  as  men  may  make 
particular  contracts,  they  may  make  particular  figns  of  them,  (as  is 
the  Ring  2nd  taking  hands  in  Marriage*,  the  crowning  of  a  Chrifti- 
an King,  &c.J  But  if  you  fuppofe  the  Independant  Covenant  to  re- 
peat alio  and  contain  the  Covenant  of  Chriftianity  it  felf  as  the  firft: 
part,  then  that  which  is  required  is  but  Jigmfied  consent  :  And  as  all 
Chriftians  renew  their  confent  at  each  Encharifl  Sacrament  ally,  fo  do 
they  frequently  by  word  and  dud,  and  all  due  fignificationof  confent- 
Nature  and  Cuftom  of  humane  converfe  have  made  words  and  ge- 
ftures  fignifiers  of  confent.-  But  Sacraments  and  folemn  badges  of 
this  nature  fignifie  by  b;ftitntionot  the  inventer  or  impofer. 

The  fin  lyeth  in  arrogating  Chrifts  prerogative,  and  accufing  his 
Lawsof  infufficiency.  If  Chrift  (byhisadt.and  fpint)  had  not  fepa- 
rated  one  day  in  feven  for  the  Commemoration  of  his  Refurreftion, 

X  2  he 


he  had  not  told  us  that  this  is  his  own  work  as  Legiflator.  But  now  he 
hath  feparated  one  day,  if  man  wiil  make  a  Law  that  another  day 
alfoof  the  week  fhall  be  feparated  to  the  fame  ufe,  it  is  as  much  as 
to  fay,  I.  We  have  authority  to  make  fttch  Laws  as  Chrift  made,  2,  And 
to  amend  his  Law  by  this  addition.  For  if  it  had  been  fit  to  be  made, 
there  was  the  fame  reafon  then  for  Chrift  to  have  feparated  two 
days. 

So  kit  in  this  cafe.  If  Chrift  had  made  no  Sacraments,  we  might 
more  have  doubted  whether  he  took  it  for  his  proper  work:  But 
where  he  hath  made  two,  to  make  more  of  the  fame,  nature,  to  me 
feemeth  too  bold:  He  could  have  made  the  Sacrament  of  the  dedica- 
ting Crofs  if  he  would  have  had  it.  If  our  Bifhops  fhould  command 
us  to  fay  we  believe  Chrifts  refurre&ion,  or  to  ftand  up  to  (ignifie 
it,  to  avoid  confufed  noife,  we  refufe  it  not ;'  But  if  they  would  make 
a  Law  that  none  (hall  be  Chriftened  that  will  not  let  the  Prieft  put  him 
intoa  Coffin  or  Grave  and  take  him  out  again  to  reprefent  the  Refur- 
rection,  1  think  it  fafeft  to  deny  obedience  to  fuch  arrogant  ufurpation. 

§.7.  He  confcffeth,  It  belongs  to  Chrift  only  to  appoint  the  means  of 
conveying  his  own  grace. 

Anfw.  I  have  before  proved  that  the  Crofs  is  by  this  Church  ap- 
pointed as  fuch  a  means,  and  named  the  Grace  and  conveyance. 

§.  8.  He  faith,  {Though  it  belong  to  the  King  t*  make  the  badge  or 
fymbolof  his  ownfubjetts,  yet  every  Nobleman  may  give  a  diftinfl  Liver  J 
without  treafion7\ 

Anfw.  True;  And  this  opens  the  Cafe.  A  badge  of  the  Kings  fnb- 
jects  is  not  the  fame  thing,  with  the  badge  of  a  fubjects  fervant.-  But 
the  Crofs  is  not  the  badge  of  a  humane  fubordinate  contract  or  re- 
lation (as  City  Covenants,  or  Paftoral  particular  contracts,  &c.)  but 
of  Chrift  ianity  it  felf,  and  of  the  fubjectsbf  Chrift  as  fuch. 

§.  9.  p.  553.  He  faith,  Is  our  worfiiip  dire  tied  to  it  or  may  we  kneel 
before  i>,  as  Mr,  B.  allows  men  may  do  before  a  Crucifix? 

Anfw-  But  if  this  be  not  true,  or  be  a  deceiving  intimation,  you 
fhould  not  allow  your  felf  to  write  it.  My  words  are  in  Chrift-  Di- 
rect, q.  11.3,  p.  876.  When  I  had  named  21  Cafes  in  which  an  Image 
may  not  be  ufed,  (and  among  the  reft,  when  it  is  fcandalous,  or 
tempting  to  fuperftition,  &c.J  I  named  many  Cafes  in  which  an 
Image  may  be  ufed  *,  and  fay  {that  it  is  not  unlawful  to  fray  before  or 
towards  an  Image,  in  a  Room  where  they  are  placed  only  for  Ornament, 
&c-2  Is  this  to  fay,  (worjhip  may  be  directed  to  it  ?  or  that  we  may 
kneel  before  #  Crucifix  )  )  when  1  had  before  excepted  the  Images  of 

God, 


(  157) 

God,  Chrift,  &o  in  worfhip,  on  feveral  reafons  ?  Doth  any  Pro- 
teftant  doubt  of  what  I  aflert  ?  My  Parlour  hath  on  all  four  fides 
the  pictures  of  our  living  friends :  muft  I  not  pray  in  that  room  be- 
caufemyface  will  be  ftiii  towards  fome  of  them?  Doth  he  doubt  of 
this?  Or  is  not  his  citing  one  half  of  the  words  as  he  doth,  to  deceive 
his  credulous  Reader,  if  not  worfe  ? 

$.  10.  He  faith,  Kneeling  be f^e  a  Crucifix  is  lawful  to  bim  juppofvig 
the  mind  be  only  excited  by  it. 

Anfw-  A  Calumny  made  up  by  fetting  together  two  fcraps  of  remote 
fentences.  i.  Becaufe  I  fay  it's  lawful  to  pray  in  a  room  wnere  pictures 
fnot  any)  are  before  me,  for  meer  ornament,,  therefore  he  feigns  me 
to  fay,  hi  lawful  to  kneel  before  a  Crucifix.  2.  And  elfewhere  I  fay, 
It  is  lawful  to  be  excited  to  a  good  thought  by  feeing  a  Deaths-head-,  or 
any  of  Cods  works,  and  fo  it  is  by  feeing  a  Crucifix,  (which  no  fober 
Chriitian  doubts  of)  he  feigns  me  to  make  it  an  exciting  fign  to  him 
that  kneels  before  it. 

§.  1 1.  Yea  he  makes  fo  much  ufe  of  his  own  calumny  asp.  354. 
to  prove  me  flrangely  partial,  Allowing  it  to  be  lawful  to  pray  before  a 
Crucifix  as  a  medium  excitant,  as  an  objecl  that  ftirs  up  in  us  worshipping 
affections,  and  fo  excufe  all  Papifis  from  Idolatry  that  profefs  they  ufe  a 
Crucifix  for  no  other  end. 

Anfw  Meer  repeated  forgery,  not  becoming  his  profefFion.  I  ne- 
ver fpake  for  praying  before  it,  much  iefs  as  an  objecl:  toftir  up 
worfhipping  affections  :  But  only  that  I  am  not  bound  to  fly  at 
prayer  from  a  room  that  hath  only  ornamental  pictures',  and  that 
as  in  the  Geneva  Bible  there  be  Hiftorical  pictures,  and  few  but  Turks 
are  againft  them,  it  is  lawful  (I  fay  not  kneeling  before  them  at 
prayer,  but  out  of  cafes  of  fcandal  and  danger)  to  be  excited  by  them 
to  good  affections,  and  indeed  good  affections  are  worshipping  af- 
fection*. Dare  any  Chriftian  fay  that  it  is  a  fin  to  think  reverently 
of  God  when  we  fee  his  works,  or  fee  but  a  picture  of  Scripture  Hi- 
ftory  (as  Abraham  offering  lfaacy  Chrift  dying  and  rifing,  exej  Non- 
conformifts  have  ftill  taken  them  for  Lyers  that  faid  they  were  a- 
gainft  Hiftorical  pictures  *,  and  (hewed  it  in  the  Geneva  Bible.  I  have 
feen  in  many  pious  country  Houfesalltheftory  of  Dives  and  Lazjtrus 
painted  over  their  Tables,  and  never  heard  the  good  ufe  of  it  ac- 
cufed.  But  I  defirethe  Reader  to  perufe  my  words,  which  he  citetb, 
Qjeft.  11 1.  and  judge  with  what  honefty  we  are  accufed.  I  there  fay, 
1.  It  is  unlawful  to  make  any  Image  of  God.  4  It  is  unlawful  to  makey 
place  or  ufe  an  Image  as  is  like  to  do  mere  hurt  than  good,  or  to  tempt  to 

fin: 


cm) 

fin :  — —  And  all  fncb  Images  of  creatures  as  others  ufe  to  give  unlawful  wor- 
fhip  or  honour  to,  when  like  to  tempt  others  to  the  life  ',  as  among  the  Papifls 
the  Image  of  the  Crucifix ,  the  Virgin  Mary  and  Angels  rhay  not  be  made% 
placed  or  ufedfo  as  may  tempt  any  to  worship  them  fitfully  as  they  do.  1 1.  It 
is  unlawful  to  place  Imtgts  in  Churches  or  in  fecret  before  our  eyes 
when  we  are  worjhipping  God,  when  it  tendeth  to  corrupt  the  mind  ■—  which 
is  the  ordinary  effecl  of  Images.  12.  It  is  unlawful  to  ufe  Images  fcanda- 
toufly,  as  any  of  the  aforefaid  finners  ufe  them,  though  we  do  it  not  with  the 
fame  intent :  that  is,  fo  as  in  outward  appearance  is  the  fame  with  their 
ufe,  Becaufe  fo  we  (hall  difiionbur  God  as  they  do,  and  harden  them  in  fin  : 
Therefore  Images  in  Churches  or  in  Oratories  in  thofe  Countries  where  others 
ufe  them  fin  fully,  orjiear  fuch  Countries,  where  the  fame  may  harden  men 
in  their  fin,  is  evil*  21.  I  think^it  unlawful  to  make  an  Image  or  any  equal 
inftituted  fign  to  be  the  publicly  common  fymbol  of  the  Chriftian  Religion , 
though  but  a  profeffing  fign  fas  they  make  the  Crofs.y 

Doth  this  doctrine  jultifie  the  Papifts  ?  And  p.  876.  §  14.  I  larg- 
ly  prove  the  ufe  of  a  Crucifix  (as  they  do  the  Crofs  in  baptifm)  to  be 
unlawful:  which  he  anfwereth  not.  Is  it  not  confiftent  with  all  this 
that  I  fay,  [That  it* s  not  unlawful  to  pray  before  or  towards  an  Image,  in  a 
room  where  Images  are  placed  only  for  ornament,  and  we  have  no  refpetl  to 
them  as  a  medium  or  objetl  of  ourworfhip  {except  as  by  accident  it's  made 
unlawful.)  And  that  (nqt  kneeling  to  them,  nor  in  prayer,  but,  in  tran- 
fient  meditation,)  it  is  lawful  fo  to  ufe  them  biftoric  ally  as  to  fiir  up  in  us 
a  worfJnpping  affetlion.']  If  the  Papifts  do  no  more,  no  Proteitant  would 
call  themldolaters  for  it.  But  if  they  ufe  them  IdoLatroufly,  it  makes 
our  ufeof  them  unlawful,  when  even  but  outwardly  it  is  like  theirs-: 
And  fo  I  fay  of  the  Crofs.  This  is  the  Doctors  zeal  againft  Idolatry, 
that  it  feems  would  havens  all  ufed  as  his  Books  intimate,  till  we  dare 
ufe  the  Tranfient  Image  of  the  Crofs  much  worle  than  he  maketh  the 
Papifts  to  ufe  Images  and  Crucifixes  in  particular.  For  to  ufe  them  as  a 
dedicating  common  badge  of  Chriflianity,  in  our  great  Covenant  with  Chrift, 
is  more  than  to  ufe  them  hiflorically  and  in  meditation,  or  more  than  to 
pray  in  rooms  adorned  with  common  pictures.  Butheknowcth  that 
the  Papifts  give  more  to  Images. 

§.    12.  Obj.   But  what  need  had  you  to  fay  all  this  of  Images  ? 

Anfw.  That  men  may  underftand  it.  1'le  tell  you  that  you  may  fee 
the  Candor  of  our  accufers.  Dr.  R.  Coxe  Bifhop  of  Ely  confulted 
with  Caffander  to  have  had  Images  in  our  Churches*  7 he  Lutherans  fo  ufe 
them.  Our  new  Church  of  England  began  to  fet  up  Crucifixes  over  Altars, 
and  to  pkad  more  for  Church-pictures  than  heretofore.    In  1642.  the 

Pariia- 


(*S9) 

Parfiament  ordered  the  defacing  all  Images  of  any  Perfon  of  the  Tri- 
nity in  Churches  or  Church-yards,  (before  the  King  went  from  them) 
B-caiifel  read  chis  Order  and  the  Church- warden  attempted  to  obey 
it,  the  rabble  of  drunken  fwearing  Journy-men,  who  were  all  for 
Conformity,  rofe  in  a  tumult  with  clubs,  leeking  to  kill  me  and  the 
Churchwardens,and  knocktdown  two  Country-men  becaufe  they  were 
our  friends  (who  carried  the  hurt  to  their  death:)  And  the  Conform- 
ing Clergy  were  fo  much  for  them,  that  one  of  them  indicted  meat 
the  Afllzes,  and  I  was  forced  to  leave  the  Country.  Such  rage  for  Ima- 
ges tempted  fome  religious  men  that  were  againft  them,  to  be  more 
cenforious  againft  theConformifts  than  I  would  have  them,  and  to 
run  too  near  the  other  extream  :  And  after  it  grew  a  difpute  whether 
the  Lutherans  were  not  Hereticks  ( of  which  fee  Cafpar  Strefo.)  The 
remembrance  of  all  this  drew  me  to  fay  all  the  Truth  which  I  thought 
ufeful  to  cure  mens  over-much  cenfuring  the  Lutherans  and  the  new 
Prelatifts :  And  now  the  thanks  they  give  me  is  to  turn  the  cenfure  on 
my  felf  for  faying  fo  much  to  excufethem. 

Juft  fo  did  Mr. Pierce  by  me :  My  religious  neighbours  fcrupled  Com- 
munion with  their  neighbour  Prelatifts,  faying,  All  the  drunkards  and 
fwearers  and  ignorant  ungodly  people  that  had  no  religion,  were 
fierce  for  Bifhops,  Liturgy  and  Ceremonies,  and  they  durft  not  joyn 
with  them  while  they  profaned  the  Sacrament.  I  was  far  from  jufti- 
fying  them,  but  to  abate  their  overmuch  cenfuring,  1  told  them  that 
in  fome  Countries  where  cuftome  had  brought  fome  particular  fin 
from  under  difgrace,  we  could  not  judge  one  gracelefs,  whofe  whole 
lives  elfe  were  pious,  temperate  and  juft,  for  fometime  committing 
that  particular  fin  ",  and  it  was  hard  to  fay  how  oft  this  might  fall  out : 
As  breaking  the  Lords  day  in  Geneva  and  Holland,  fome  petty  Oath  in 
fome  Countries  that  ufe  it,  and  fuch  like.  For  this  charity  to  the  Pre- 
latifts, what  doth  Mr.  Tierce  but  turn  the  charge  of  favouring  fuch 
grofs  fin  againft  my  felf,  as  if  I  had  been  compounding  it  with  god- 
linefs  ? 

1  leave  you  all  therefore  hereafter,  better  to  defend  your  felves. 

§.  13..  About  their  appointing  theCrofsto  worl^  Grace  morally,  and 
that  Sacraments  work^it  not  phyfically^  he  faith,  J  mifreprefent  or  mifapply 
both  the  Popifli  and  Proteflant  dottrtne  of  Sacraments.']  And  for  thefirft  he 
faith,  It  overthrows  all  that  I  fay  that  they  all  hold  that  Sacraments  worl^ 
grace,  ex  opere  opera  to,  where  there  is  n*  atlual  impediment,  and  itys  he- 
rtfic  to  fay,  They  are  bare  outward  prof  effing  pgw.~} 

Anfw* 


Anfw.  Did  he  think  that  this  is  inconfiftent  with  the  opinion  that 
they  work.it  morally  ?  They  diftinguifh  between  the  Principal  Agent, 
the  inftrumental  Operator,  and  the  Receiver.  And  they  fay  that  the 
Sacrament  conveyeth  Grace  by  the  will  of  the  Principal  Agent  (GodJ 
ex  opere  operato,  and  hath  not  its  effed  e x  opere  operantis-,  And  that 
ophs  operantis  is  that  which  vim  habet  ex  bonitate  &  devotiont  ejus  qui 
cperatur,  that  is,  from  the  Miniftersgoodnefs  (And  doth  not  the  Eng- 
lijh  Canon  fay  the  fame  ? )  But  opus  operatum  is  that  which  is  effectual, 
modo  fiat  ficut  lex  prafcribit,  whether  the  inftrument  be  good  or  bad : 
But  it  mull  be  ficut  lex  prafcribit :  And  when  they  come  to  the  Recei- 
ver they  require  in  him  more  than  the  opus  operatum  to  the  effect :  viz.. 
that  he  intend  fas  Aquinas  fpeaketh,  3.  q.  68.4.7.)  to  receive  Bap~ 
tifm,  which  is  the  beginning  of  a  new  lifey  and  that  he  have  faith,  a.  8.  r. 
ex  parte  gratia  quam  quis  per  baptifmum  confequitur,  exigitur  in  fufcipien- 
te  fides,  exp-trte  vero  Char  aft  eris  non  nee  ejf art  a  eft.  The  Character  is 
received  without  real  Faith,  but  Grace  is  not.  And  what  that  Cha- 
racter is  how  little  they  are  agreed  fee  at  large  in  Wotton  de  Reconcil. 
Peccat.  Durandusj,  and  the  wifeft  fay  it  is  but  the  Relation  of  one  that 
hath  received  the  external  tejfera  or  badge  of  Chriftianity  (which 
none  deny. )  And  ad  2.  he  taith,  \jhe  Church  quantum  in  fe,  non  in- 
tend* dare  baptifmum  nifi  habentibus  reftam  fidem,  fine  qua  non  eft  remifi 
fio  peccatorum.  Et  propter  hoc  interrogat  accedentes  ad  baptifmum  an  ere- 
Aant  ?  And  citeth  Auftin,  that  without  true  faith  it  is  net  received  to 
falvation.    . 

And  Art.  9.  he  concludeth  that  feeing  God  doth  not  compell  men  to 
right eoufnefs,  ifsmanifeft  that  feigned  comers  obtain  not  the  benefit  of  bap- 
ttfm.  And  ad  3.  inter  fitte  accedentes,  he  numbers  them  that  come  in  mor- 
tal fin,  net  willing  to  leave  it  and  be  conformed  to  Chrift. 

And  your  own  words  imply  all  this,  that  the  Receiver  muft  put  no  hin- 
derance~]  while  they  make  the  want  of  neceflary  intention,  defire,  true 
faith,  repentance,  to  be  the  hinderance,  leaving  the  fubject  uncapable 
of  the  Grace  of  the  Sacrament  of  Baptifm." 

§.  14.  It  irketh  me  to  repeat,  but  you  conftrain  me:  Scotland 
Okam  (and  then  I  need  not  fay  how  many  morej  confute  Aquinas  at 
large  for  calling  Sacraments  fomuch  aslnftruments  giving  Grace,  as 
heexplainethif,  And  fo  doth  Vet.  Aliaco  Camerac  briefly  in  4.9.  1. 
B.  C  concluding  that  Sacraments  are  no  Caufes  of  Grace  properly, 
but  improperly,  becaufe  Deus  in  facramentis  ndinavit  fie  agere,  non  quod 
ipfa  facramenta  agant< And  that  a  facrament  neither  by  its  own  vir- 
tue, nor  by  any  virtue  given  it y  is  any  proper  efficient  taufe  of  any  difpofi- 

tion 


( i«? ; 

tion  irt  the  foul  previous  to  grace9  or  of  grace  it  felf,  hut  a  condition  fine  qua 
non,  difpofitiv  ,  improperly  called  Caufa  difpofitiva  Moralis,  non  efi 
fettiva  fedreceptiva :  Yet  they  grant  alfo  a  Moral  objective  caufality, 
by  fignification. 

Brianfon  In  4..  q.  i.fol.  6.  concludeth  (i.doc-J  facr  amenta  non  funt 
gratia  caufa  effcftiva,  fed  fclttm  per  modum  meritiper  cadatur gratia,  ci- 
ting Ricardus,  Scotus,  Aureolus,  Franc.  Perufiusj  &c.  againfl:  Thorn.  & 
Alexand.  herein.  Yet  faith  [Baptifmus  indiget fide,  qua  eft  difpofitio  & 
fundamentum  omnium  facramentorum,  vel  in  fe  ut  in  adult  is,  vel  in  alio  ut 
inparvulis.  Suarez.de  Legib.l.  p.  c.  6.^.748.  Col.Z.  deCircumcif  \_Nam 
etiam  ipfa  fides  parentum  erat  conditio  neceffaria  &  fine  qua  non  •,  Et  ta- 
mendeiiladici  non  poteft,  Quod  Gratiam  daret  Infant i  ex  opere  operato% 
nee  quod  gratiam  contineret  •  etiam  nee  caufa  juftificans  parvulos  dici  po- 
teft'-, rife  late  &  improprio  modo,  ficutdicitur  de  quolibet  remedio  vel  con- 
dition e.  fine  qua  non. 

And  Brianfonztfo  faith  in  \>q. 4.  doc.  1.  fol.  34  Sl*pd  ficie  recipi- 
entes  baptijmum  non  hah  ent  gratiam  baptifmi,  dicunt  Scholaftici. 

Yea  even  Hildebrand  in  one  of  his  Roman  Councils  concludeth,  that 
the  Sacraments  of  Baptifm  and  Penance  give  not  pardon  to  the  impe- 
nitent and  uncapable. 

Petrus  aS.JofephThef  univerf.  de  facram.  p.  93.  faith,  [Sacr amen- 
tum eft  fignum  fenfibilt  divinitus  inftitutum,  longo  tempore  durans,  fancli- 
tatem  aliquam,  faltem  extemam  (that  is,  Relative  feparation  to  God, 
which  is  the  true  Chara&er- with  them)  conferens,  &  veram  figmficans. 

And  p.  10 1.  \_Sacr  amenta  nov a  legis  confer unt  gratiam,  pdtjue  ex  ope- 
re operate  &  immediate  :  Duplicem  fcilicet,  aliam  refpondentem  dtfpofi- 
tioni,  aliam  ipfi  facramento :   cum  antiqua  adultis  nullam    conferrent  nifi 

ratione  difpofitionis Sacrament  a  nova  legis  nonproducunt  gratiam  phy- 

fice,  fed  tantum  moraliter.2 

But  I  mufl:  fpare  the  Reader  :  By  this  he  may  underftand,  1.  That 
tb*y  hold  not  to  the  opus  operatum  as  efficient  of  Grace  in  the  Sacra- 
ments of  the  old  Law,and  fo  not  to  Sacraments  as  Sacraments:  2.  That 
they  put  opus  operatum  againfl:  opus  operantis,  and  not  againfl  the  ne- 
ceffary  difpofition  of  the  Receiver,  which  confifteth  in  Faith,  Repen- 
tance, intention,  &c 

3.  That  many  of  them  deny  all  proper  Sacramental  caufality  of 
Grace.  4-Specially  Phyfical.  (And  Proteftants  make  them  not  mcerfigns, 
butinvefting  figns.)  5.  And  ponere  obicem  is  to  want  neceffary  racial 
qualification,  and  action  as  aforefaid. 

Y  And 


(  i*»  ) 

And  now  the  Dr.  had  done  well  to  tell  me  wherein  I  was  very  much 
tfiiftaken. 

§.  15.  He  next  faith,  {The  Croft  is  in  no  fence  held  to  be  an  inftru- 
ment  appointed  for  conveying  Graced} 

Anfw.  1.  Not  by  God,  for  it  is  none  ofGod*s  Ordinances.  2.  But 
that  by  men  it  is  I  hare  manifefted  j  if  z  moral  obje^ive  moving  and 
teaching  means  may  be  called  an  Inftrument :  If  not,  the  word 
Inftrument  is  nothing  to  our  cafe.  1.  To  work  on  the  foul  of  thea- 
dulfi  by  reprefentation,  (Ignification,  excitation  (  as  the  word  doth) 
is  to  be  an  operative  moral  caufe  or  means :  And  this  the  Church 
afcribeth  to  it  (Pref.toLiturg.  &c.^  2.  The  death  of  Chrift,  and 
the  benefits  of  it,  and  reception  into  the  Church  and  State  of  Chri- 
ftianity,  and  the  fenfe  of  our  Engagement  to  fight  under  Chrift's  ban- 
ner, &c  are  Grace*,  fome of  which  is  given  by  excitation  and  fome 
(the  Relation,)  by  inveftiture. 

§.  16  And  now  whether  I  have  only  invented  thefe  objections  to  a> 
mufe  and  perplex  mens  conferences^  and  this  Dr.  hath  made  allfo  plain 
that  all  may  venture  on  it,  and  he  and  all  Minifters  may  deny  them 
Chriftendom  that  dare  not  venture,  and  call  out  all  from  the  Mini- 
ftry  that  be  not  as  bold  as  he,  I  leave  to  confideration. 

He  next  turneth  to  Mr.  A  about  bowing,  and  fo  goeth  to  their  Ex- 
communication 


CHAR 


(  1*3  ) 
CHAP.    XL 

Whether  the  Excommunicating  Church,  or  the  Excom- 
municated for  not  Communicating  when  Excommu- 
nicated be  guilty  of  Schi[?n  ? 

§.  l.  *Ti  Heir  Canons  excorinunic ate  ipfo  fafto  all  that  fay  Conformi- 
X  tyis  unUvful,  lad  many  fuch  like.  i.  He  fakh  [The  ex- 
communication is  not  againft  fuch  as  modeftly  fcruple  the  lawfulnefs  of 
things  impofed ;  but  thofe  xko  cb'h^ately  affrtv  it. 

Anfw.  Reader,  troft  neither  him  nor  me,  but  read  the  words.  Can. 
3,  4,  5,  6.  [Whofoever  fijall  ajfrm  that  the  Church  of  England  by  Law  e- 
fiablijbed  under  his  Afajefiy  is  ut  a  true  and  an  Apoftolical  Church,  —  le* 
him  be  excommunicated  ipfo  fa  do. 

Whofoever  foall  affirm  that  the  form  of  God's  worfhip  in  the  Church  of 
England  eftablified  by  the  Law,  and  contained  in  the  Book^of Common- 
prayer is  a  eorrupt,  fuperftitious,  or  unlawful  worjljip  of  God,  or  con- 
tained ANT  THING  in  it  that  is  repugnant  to  the  Scriptures,  let  him  be 
excommunicated  ipfo  fadlo,  and  not  reftored  till,  &c 

Whofoever  flail  affirm  that  any  rf  the  39  Articles,  are  in  any  part  fu- 
perftitious or  erroneous,  or  fuch  as  he  may  not  with  a  good  confeience  fub- 
fcribe  unto  >  let  him  be  excommunicated  ipfo  facfto ,  and  net  reftored 
till,  &c. 

Whofoever  fhall  affirm  that  the  Rites  and  Ceremonies  of  the  Church  0/ Eng- 
land by  Law  eftablijhed  are  wicked,  antichriftian,  or  fuperftitious ,  OR  fuch 
as  being  commanded  by  lawful  authority,  men  who  avre  z.ealoufly  and  Godly  of- 
fered may  not  with  any  good  confeience  approve  them,  ufethem,  OR  as  oc- 
casion requireth  fubferibe  to  them,  let  him  be  excommunicated  ipfo  fadlOf 
and  not  reftored  till  he  repent  and  pnblickly  revoke  fuch  his  wicked  er- 
rours. 

Can.  7.  Whofoever  JliaM  hereafter  affirm,  that  the  Government  of  the 
Church  of  England  under  his  Majefty  by  Arch-B'flops,  B  flops,  Be  a  is, 
Arch-Deacons,  and  THE  REST  THAT  BEAR  OFFICE  IN  the 
fame,  is  antichriftian,  OR  repugnant  to  the  word  of  God,  let  himb-j  excom- 
municate ipfo  facfto,  &c. 

Y  2  Can. 


(  i*4  ) 

Can.    8.    Whofoevtr  jhall  affirm  that  the  form  and  manner  rf  making* 
and  confecrating  Bijliops,  Priefts-or  Deacons,  cwtaineth  ANY  THING  in 

it  that  is  repugnant  to  the  word  of  God, let  them  be  excommunicate  ipfo 

facto,  &c. 

Can.-  II.  Whofoever  fhall  affirm — that 'there  are  within  this  Realm, 
other  Meetings,  AJfemblies,  or  Congregations  of  the  Kings  born  fubjetlsi 
thanfuch  /is  by  the  Law  of  this  Land  are-held  and  allowed,  which  may  right- 
ly challenge  to  themfelves  the  Name  cf  true  and  lawful  Churches,  let  him  be 
excommmunicate  ipfo  facto,  &c. 

And  now  if  the  Reader  will  no  more  believe  the  Doctor,  it  is  not 
long  of  nae>     If  ail  this  be  no  more  than  to  excommunicate  them  that 
[obfiinately  affirm  the  Ceremonies  Antichriflian,  impious,  or  fupcrfiitious^ 
underftanding  them  is  not  polTible. 

$.  2.  But  I  confefs  they  excommunicate  not  men  for  fecret  thoughts^ 
We  thank  them  for  nothing.  It  is  but  for  telling  their  judgment. 
And  DiiTenters  may  have  many  occafions  to  tell  it.  The  Kings  Com- 
million  once  allowed  fomeofus  to  tell  it:  The  Demands,  Accufati- 
ons,  calumniating  Books  and  Sermons,  &c.  may  call  many  to  it. 

§.    i.  He  faith,  All  Excommunication  fuppofetkprecedent  Admonition. 

Anfw.  i.  They  fhould  do  lb:  The  worfe  is  yours  becaufe  it  doth 
notfo:  It  only  alloweth  admonition  to  repent  for  his  reftoration: 
which  made  M.  Anton.  Spalatenfis  lay  fo  much  againft  it. 

2.  If  it  did  oblige  you  to  admonifh  us,  as  you  have  done  by  your 
Books,  you  know  that  this  changeth  not  our  judgments:  So  that. to 
be  excommunicate  before  the  admonition  and  after  comes  all  to  one: 
But  indeed  when  the  Law  ipfo  f alio  excommunicateth,  the.Lawitfelf 
is  the  admonition. 

$.  4.  He  addeth  [General  excommunications  though  they  be  Iatse  fen- 
tent  i  a?,  do  mt  a  feci  the  particular  perfons  till  the  evidence  be  notorious,  not 
only  of  the  bare  fall,  but  the  contumacy^ 

Anfw.  AffeBmg  is  a  word  that  fignifieth  what  you  pleafe.  Ipfo  fatlo 
is  [for  and  upon  the  fall  proved,  without  any  fentence  ofajudge.~]  While 
the  faft  only  is  thus  made  th?  full  caufe,  the  contumacy  need  not  be 
proved.  It's  true,  1.  That  the  fail  muft  be  proved,  2.  Andthenthe 
Law  is-a  fentence  and  Relatively  affefteth  the  perfon  as  fentence d;  3.  But 
no  perfons  elfe  are  obliged  to  avoid  him,  till  the  faB  be  lawfully  publifh-. 
ed.  But  the  man  is  excommunicate.  And  4.  Whether  the  man  that 
knoweth  the  Law  and  his  own  Fact  be  not  bound  himfelf  to  avoid 
the  Churches  Communion,  is  a  great  Controvedle  :  And.  the.  plain 
truth  is,  Ific  be  a  juft  Excommunication,  he  is  bound  to  forbear 

Com-. 


(  t*5 ; 

Communion  in  obedience  to  ft :  (As  much  as  a  filenced  Minifter  is-  to 
forbear  Preaching- J  But  if  it  be  a  fentence  unj'ift,  and  injuftice  be 
not  fo  grofs  as  to  nullifie  it,  ftillhe  maft  forbear:  But  if  it  befoun- 
juftastobe  invalid,  he  may  Communicate  till  he  be  executively  re- 
jected :  (Asonefo  unjuftly  filenced  may  preach,  if  he  can :  for  the 
cafe  is  much  like.  J 

The  Reader  would  be  difpleafcd  if  I  fhould  cite  him  many  Cafuifts 
in  fo  plain  a  cafe. 

2.  But  no  man  doubteth  but  the  General  fentence  of  the  Canon 
fpeaketh  the  fence  of  the  Church,  and  doth  all  that  Law-makers  can 
do,  before  judgment :  And  the  Law  is  norma  officii  &  judicii,  obli- 
ging Subjefr  and  Judge. 

§.  5.  It's  true  that  Linwood  faith,  that  a  Declaratory  fentence,  that 
is,  A  Declaration  that  fuch  a  man  it  already  fentenced \  by  the  Law ,  is  ne- 
ceffary  to  oblige  any  to  the  execution  of  it  on  others,  or  the  perfon 
in  faro  externo.  But  ft  ill  the  Church  hath  done  her  part  in  Legiflation, 
to  oblige  asaforefaid. 

$.  6.  He  faith  [Perfons  excommunicate  are  to  be  denounced  fo  every  fix 
months,  that  others  may  have  notice  of  them .] 

j4nfw-  1.  But  are  they  not  excommunicate  then,  before  they  are 
fo  oft  denounced,  yea  or  at  aH;  as  far  as  aforefaid  ? 

$-.  7.  He  faith  £/  have  fully  ax  fared  my  own  Objection  by  faying,  I 
dm  not  bound  to  execute  the  fentence  on  my  fclf-2 

Anfw.  1.  He  would  not  fay  that  he  approveththe  anfwer  :  For  if 
he  do,  he  confuteth  himfelf,  that  would  have  us  execute  the  filencing 
fentence  on  our  felves,  and  the  fentence  againft  publick  worfhip  in 
any  way  but  theirs. 

2.  My  reafon  is,  becaufe  I  take  the  unjuft  fentence  as  invalid  .- 
elle  I  Wfre  bcund  in  fore  inter tore . 

3.  Butfurethe  Church  at  leaft  relaxeth  that  mans  obligation  to 
prefent  Communion,  by  (hewing  her  will,  if  (he  did  not  oblige  him 
to  withdraw. 

Read  over  the  words  of  the  Canon,  and  fee  whether  they  make 
them  not  as  unintelligible  and  flexible  to  what  fenfe  they  pleafe,  as 
they  do  the  words  of  the  Aft  of  Uniformity  and  Liturgy. 

§.  8.  As  to  his  two  cafes  in  which  the  excommunicate  may  be  fchifc 
maticks  for  not  communicating,  1.  We  queftion  not  the  firft  :  Juft 
excommunication  excludeth  none  but  the  guilty.  Here  then  indeed 
is  the  ftate  of  our  Controverfie.  Had  he  proved  that  in  all  the  cafes 
before  cited,  it  is  juft  to  excommunicate  us,  he  had  done  fomewhar, , 
when  now  for  want  of  it  he  betrayeth  his  cau£r.  2i  His* 


(  \66) 

2.  His  id.  is  Uf  they  form  new  Churches."] 

Anfw.  i.  Is  forming  new  Churches  and  not  communicating  with  the  old 
wesatlone't  Our  prefent  queftion  is  of  the  later.  So  that  this  great 
Accafer  feemeth  plainly  to  abjolve  all  from  being  bound  to  Commu- 
nicate with  them,  who  are  unjuftly  excommunicate,  and  gather  not  new 
Churches* 

2.  But  may  not  the  unjuftly  excommunicate  that  cannot  on  juffc 
terms  be  reftored,  worfhip  God  in  fome^ublick  Church  ?  Doth  fuch 
a  wicked  fentencebindmento  live  like  Atheifts  till  death/  or  de- 
prive them  of  their  right  to  ail  God's  Ordinances?  even  many  Papift 
Do&ors  and  Councils  fay  the  contrary.  And  how  elfe  do  you  juftifie 
the  Church  of  England  againfl  the  Papifts  charge  of  Schifm? 

$.  9.  f.  372.  He  ftill  feemeth  to  think,  that  ^Hisown  and  others 
reafonings  may  change  all  the  truly  honeft  Chriftians  in  the  Land  to  hold  alt 
the  things  imp  ofed  lawful^] 

Anfw*  Thefe  thoughts  of  the  Bifhops  in  1660.  and  1661.  have 
brought  us  all  to  the  pafs  that  we  are  at:,  And  if  after  20  years  fo 
great  experience  of  the  inefficacy  of  all  their  Difputes,  yea  and  Pri- 
sons, and  after  the  notice  of  the  nature  and  different  cafes  of  men, 
they  ftill  trufl:  to  bring  us  to  Concord  on  thefe  terms,  difputing  with 
fuch  men  is  in  vain  •,  The  Lord  deliver  us  from  them. 


CHAP. 


C**7) 

CHAP.    XIL 

Of  the  Englilh  fort  of  Sponfors,  and  the  exclufion  of 
Parents  duty. 

$•  *4  T^ge  ^°*   ^e  foth  I  \^  fever  al  times  mention  this  as  one  of  the 
JL   grounds  of  the  mlawfulnefs  of  the  peoples  joyning  in  Communion 
with  hs  :  yea  as  the  greatefl  objettion.~] 

Anfw.  Four  places  of  my  writings  are  cited,  and  all  will  teftifie 
to  him  that  will  read  them,  the  untruth  of  the  Doctors  words.  This 
is  an  unhappy  courfe  of  accufations :  I  can  find  no  word  of  £  The 
mlawfulnefs  of  the  peoples  joyning  in  Communion  with  you  on  this  ground*"] 
On  the  contrary,  I  have  taught  men  how  to  make  this  very  action  in 
them  lawful,  viz.  By  getting  if  poffible  credible  Sponfors  of  the  old 
fort,  and  agreeing  with  them  to  be  Die  Parents  Reprefenter,  and  pro- 
mife  as  in  his  name,  or  at  leaft  but  as  his  fecond,  undertaking  the  E- 
ducation  of  the  Child  if  he  die  or  apoflatizje  ( which  was  the  old  fort:) 
andhimfelf  to  be  prefent  and  fignifie  his  confent  by  gefture,  though 
hemaynotfpVsk. 

But  I  have  (hewed,  i.  That  this  mult  be  done  befides  the  Churches 
order,  that  hath  no  fuch  thing.  2.  That  fubferibing  to  the  Churches 
order  herein  is  unlawful :  3.  That  the  Church  which  refufeth  the 
Child  lawfully  offered,  ought  not  to  blame  that  perfon  that  cannot  or 
will  not  make  fuchfhifts,  but  getteth  another  Pallor  to  Baptize  him 
whom  they  finfully  refufe. 

But  this  is  not  to  prove  it  unlawful  to  have  Communion  with  you. 
But  it's  lawful  to  ufe  better  alfo  when  they  can,  being  thus  Jtepulfed 
by  you. 

§.  2.  He  faith  [The  Parents  are  to  provide  fuch  as  are  ft  to  under- 
take that  office.'] 

Anfw.  1.  No  one  is  fit  for  it  as  ufed  by  the  Liturgy,  but  an  A- 
dopter  thatfaketh  the  Child  for  his  own  :  For  he  undertaketh  the  Pa- 
rents work.  And  it's  lis  fub  judice*  whether  any  others  undertaking 
befides  a  Parent  or  Owner  can  prove  the  Child  to  be  in  the  Covenant 
as  offered,  and  have  right  to  the  feal  and  benefits:  Atheifts  and  Infi- 
dels Children  are  unholy,  1  Cor*  7. 14? 

2;  If 


(  1*8  ) 

2.  If  any  were  fit,  few  Parents  can  get  fuch,  as  will  underftand- 
ingly  and  deliberately  and  credibly  promife  them  to  do  all  that  God- 
fathers muft  by  the  Liturgy  undertake.  I  never  knew  one  in  my 
life  that  feemed  to  the  Parent  to  mean  any  fuch  thing,  much  lefs  to 
do  ir. 

I  have  in  my  younger  time  been  Godfather  to  three  or  four  $  But 
we  before  agreed  with  the  Parents  to  intend  no  more  than  to  be  Wit- 
nejfesy  and  the  Father  to  be  the  Entitler  and  the  undertaker. 

I  did  in  1640.  Baptize  two  by  the  Liturgy,  (without  Croffing)  and 
never  more  in  6.  or  7.  years  after,  becaufe  of  the  impofed  corrupti- 
ons. Mr.  Kettilby  the  Bookfeller  (unlefs  his  Father  had  another  Child 
of  the  fame  name  baptized  the  fame  year)«was  one  :  But  his  Father 
gave  him  his  name,  and  prcmifed  all  his  own  duty,  and  his  Uncle  and 
Aunt  Handing  as  Sponfors,  we  before  agreed  that  they  fhould  fignifie 
butWitneJfes  and  friendly  helpers  in  cafe  of  need. 

2.  But  what  if  the  Parents  are  bid  provide  fuch  f  that  is  no  dis- 
charge of  their  own  part,  nor  are  they  bound  to  call  their  duty  on 
others. 

f.  3.  He  faith  fas  to  theChildstf^k  to  Baptifm)  that  the  Godfa- 
thers ft  and  in  a  threefold  capacity,  1.  Reprefenting  the  Parent  in 
offering,  2.  Reprefenting  the  Child  in  promifing,  $.  In  their  own  as 
undertakers  of  his  education,  &c. 

j4nfw-  1.  1  will  not  till  he  confute  them  repeat  my  proofs  that  in 
the  Church  of  England's  fence  the  Godfathers  are  not  the  Parents  re- 
prefentatives  at  all,  nor  fpeak  in  their  name. 

2.  If  they  were,  then  when  the  Parents  both  are  Atheifts,  Infi- 
dels, Hobbifts,  fcorners  at  Godlinefs,  Hereticks,  the  Godfathers 
can  reprefent  them  but  as  they  are,  and  their  own  faith  entitleth  not 
the  Child,  becaufe  they  ftand  in  the  perfons  of  Atheifts,  Infidels,  &c, 
your  Church  doth  not  like  this  doctrine. 

j.  And  as  to  their  reprefenting  the  Child,  qno  jnre  is  thedoubt.lt 
cannot  be  done  without  fome  reprefenting  power  given  them.  And 
who  gave  it  them  ? 

4.  And  as  to  the  third  Perfon  (in  this  multiform  thing)  the  doubt 
is,  whether  their  undertaking  to  educate  another  mans  Child  be  law- 
ful, while  he  is  bound  to  do  ithimfelf?  2.  And  whether  men  ufe  to  be 
ferious  in  fuch  undertakings,  which  I  never  knew  one  perform,  nor 
feem  to  mean  it,  fave  fuch  as  take  poor  mens,  ktnfmens  or  dead  mens  chil- 
dren to  keep  as  their  own.  3.  And  if  it  be  done  without  ferious  in- 
tention, Is  it  not  to  make  perjury  or  perfidioufhefs,  and  prophane 

taking 


(  1*9) 
taking  God's  name  in  vain,  to  be  the  way  of  Chriflening  and  Cove- 
nanting with  Chrift  in  order  to  falvation  ? 

§.  4.  This  is  a  great  point,  and  he  doth  well  to  handle  it  dili- 
gently; His  explication  of  it  is  this,  p.  382.   [i.  The  Church  hath  t lie ^ 
power  of  the  Keys,  (Trut  •,  but  not  as  he  and  the  Brownifts  fay,  The 
whole  Church,  but  only  the  P afters.) 

£  2.  They  may  baptise  capable  fubjects.2  No  doubt  of  it. 

£  I.  Infants  are  capable  fub]tcls7\ 

jinfa.  But  what  Infants?  All,  orfome?  Is  this  our  fatisfa&ion ? 
If  it  be  AH  Infants ,  then  how  come  the  Heathens  Infants  to  be 
baptizable  and  have  right,  when  the  Parents  have  none?  Then  how 
great  a  deed  of  charity  isic  to  bring  an  Army  among  them  to  baptize 
their  Children  by  force  ?  When  even  Aquinas  and  other  Papifts  fay, 
that  Children  may  not  be  baptized  againft  the  Parents  wills. 

I  have  elfewhere  at  large  proved,  1.  That  Baptifm  is  but  the  feal- 
ing  of  the  Covenant,  and  the  delivering  of  pofleffion  by  Minifterial 
Inveftiture,  and  not  the  firft  gift  or  condition  of  our  right  to  Chrift 
and  his  benefits. 

2.  That  in  the  Adult  faith  and  Repentance  and  heart-confent  are 
the  Conditions,  which  Baptifm  after  folemnly  exprefleth. 

*.  That  if  a  true  penitent  believing  confenter  die  without  Baptifm, 
he  is  faved ;  and  if  the  Baptized  adult  die  without  faith,  repentance 
and  heart-confent,  he  is  damned. 

4.  That  therefore  all  the  adult  muft  have  an  entitling  condition, 
to  give  them  right,  firft  initially,  coram  Deo,  to  pardon  of  fin,  and  then 
to  be  baptized  (which  folemnly  delivereth  their  full  right)  before  they 
can  be  lawfully  baptized. 

5.  That  God  dealethnot  fo  differently  with  Infants  and  Adult, 
as  to  require  conditions  of  right  in  the  later,  and  none  in  the  former, 
as  if  they  were  all  born  with  right. 

6.  That  the  Covenant  is  made  to  the  faithful  and  their  feed,  and 
that  Infantscondition  of  right  is  that  they  be  children  of  believers: 
And  that  if  both  Parents  be  Infidels,  the  Children  are  unclean,  but 
elfe  they  are  holy.  And  God  that  confoundeth  not  the  Church  and  the 
World,  confoundeth  not  their  Childrens  cafe. 

This  1  have  fully  proved  in  my  Difp.  of  Original  fin,  and  Treat,  of 
right  to  Sacraments. 

7.  That  Baptifm  fealeth  and  delivereth  to  the  qualified  fubjeft,  the 
prefent  pardon  of  fin,  and  right  to  Chrift  and  life  as  to  adopted 
Children  of  God.    And  therefore  there  muft  be  fome  reafon  and 

Z  proof 


(    I  JO   ) 

proof  of  a  right  to  it,  more  than  all  Infants  in  the  world  have. 

8.  That  it  is  not  a  mans  bringing  them  to  baptifm  and  fpeaking 
feignedly  in  their  name,  that  giveth  them  right  to  a  feaied  pardon  and 
falvation  •  It  muft  be  one  that  can  prove  himfelf  entitled  to  represent 
the  Child,  which  none  can  that  cannot  fay  He  is  my  own. 

9.  If  it  were  otherwife,  Atheifts,  Infidels,  Wicked  men,  though 
Baptized,  could  give  no  right  to  the  feaied  pardon,  or  to  the  Invefti- 
ture  maftateof  life,  to  which  they  have  no  right  themfelves^  And  if 
they  reprefent  no  better  Parents,  as  fuch  they  can  give  them  no  right, 
fave  coram  Etclefia  when  they  are  not  infddesjudicati. 

10.  Nor  doth  it  fuffice  to  an  Infants  right,  that  the  Minuter,  or 
Church,  be  Cnriftians, 

Therefore  to  tell  us  that  Infant*  are  right  fubjetts,  fignifieth  nothing, 
till  either,  1.  He  tell  us  what  Infants,  i.  Or  prove  that  all  Infants 
"have  right  *,  which  he  can  never  do :  And  if  he  could,  I  would  eafily 
prove  that  all  dying  infants  arefaved,  whether  Baptized  or  not  ^  As 
I  can  prove  that  true  Chriftian  Infants  are. 

§,  5.  While  he  gives  us  not  the  lead  fatisfa&ion  of  Infants  Right, 
he  tells  us  of  difficulties  on  the  other  fide  j  if  we  lay  it  on  Parents  for 
Owners)  right.  And  1.  He  tells  us  of  divers  mens  Opinions*,  which 
the  Reader  will  be  loth  I  (hould  digrefs  to  try,  having  done  it  fo  larg- 
ly  in  my  Chrift.  Direcft  and  Treat,  of  Right  to  Sacraments- 

2.  He  nameth  the  qualification  which  I  aflert,  [A  frofeffion  of  the 
Chrifiian  faith  not  invalidated'}  and  faith  nothing  to  difable  it,  but  that 
Others  m^  rejed  it-  Others  wild  Opfpjions  named,  goes  for  my  Con- 
futation. 

And  now  I  defirethe  Reader  to  fee  the  Catalogue  of  the  things 
we  account  finful  in  Conformity  in  my  fir  ft  Plea  for  Peace,  and  try  how 
many  of  them  the  Doctor  hath  fo  much  as  meddled  with :  And  whe- 
ther he  think  by  thefe  few  touches  he  hath  proved  either  our  Con- 
formity  lawful,  or  our  Preaching  unlawful,  or  our  Communion  with 
thofe  Chriftians  who  are  not  of  his  mind  herein  unlawful.. 

If  he  fay  again,  that  he  meddleth  not  with  Minifters  Conformity 
but  the  Peoples,  1.  Note,  how  he  hath  pa  fled  by  even  thegreateft 
things  alfoin  their  cafe.  2.  Whether  he  meddle  not  with  the  Minifters 
cafe  who  feeketh  to  prove  their  preaching  unlawful,  and  fo  perfwades 
them  to  be  filent.  3,  Whether  their  cafe  (hould  not  be  fo  far  meddled 
with,  as  to  prove  the  things  which  they  think  finful  to  be  lawful,  or  their 
preaching  unnecelTary  ,  before  the  endeavours  ufed  againft  them  (well 
known  J  be  juftified  as  needful  to  the  Churches  Peace. 

GEA-p: 


(  17*  ) 
CHAP.    XIII. 

Of  the  three  French  Letters  which  he  fubjoyneth. 

$.  i.  T  ,T  7Hat  advantage  to  the  Drs.  Caufe  the  three  Letters  of 
V  V  the  French  Divines  annexed,  can  be  to  any  that  will 
not  be  decoyed  by  meer  founds  and  fhews,  I  know  not:  But  could 
we  know  thefe  things  following,  we  might  better  underftand  the  judg- 
ment of  the  Writers* 

Queft.  i.  Whether  he  that  fought  their  judgment  djd  make  them 
underftand  what  all  our  prefent  Impofitions  and  Attsof  Conformity 
are?  and  what  alterations  are  made  in  the  Church  of  England*  fact  the 
beginning  of  Bifhop  Lands  power  ? 

2.  Whether  he  made  them  truly  underftand  the  difference  between 
the  ancient  Epifcopacy,  and  the  Englijh  Diocefan  frame  in  all  its 
parts  ? 

*.  Whether  he  did  put  the  Cafe  as  about  Subfcribing  or  Declaring, 
Covenanting  or  Swearing,  Aflent  and  Confentto  all  things,  and  pra- 
ftifing  accordingly?  or  only  of  living  in  Communion  with  them  which 
do  fuch  things  ? 

4.  Whether  he  put  the  cafe  as  of  denying  active  Communion  in  the 
practice  of  unlawful  things-,  or  as  denying  Communion  in  the  reft 
which  are  lawful?  • 

5.  Whether  he  made  them  underftand  that  we  are  ipfofattotxcom- 
muncate  by  their  Canon  for  telling  our  judgment  ? 

6.  Whether  he  made  them  underftand  that  it  was  about  2000  Mini- 
fters  that  werefilenced,  and  what  men  are  in  many  of  their  places? 
and  what  claim  their  ancient  Flocks  lay  to  many  of  them  ;  and  what 
men  they  are,  and  what  they  did  to  prevent  all  ourdivifions? 

7.  Whether  he  made  them  underftand  whatmeafure  of  Communi- 
on we  ftill  maintain  with  the  Church  of  England  and  the  ParifhChur* 
xhes  ? 

8.  Whether  he  put  the  cafe  to  them,  whether  we  that  haveCommu- 
nion  with  them  arcSchifmaticks,  if  we  alfo  have  Communion  withc- 
thers  whom  they  profecute  f 

9.  Whether  he  put  the  queftion  to  them,  whether  we  are  lawfully 
filenced?  and  if  not,  whether  rebut  pcftantibfu  we  atebound  to  forbear 
ourMiniftry?  2  2,  1.  Was 


(  *72  ) 

io.  Whether  fee  made  them  know  that  all  thf  Minifters  of  England 
as  well  as  we  were  forbidden  to  Preach,  &c.  unlefs  they  would  Con- 
form to  that  we  are  ready  to  prove  unlawful  ?  And  if  it  prove  fo,whe- 
ther  they  fhould  all  either  have  finned  or  been  filent  in  obedience  ? 

11.  Whether  he  made  them  underftand  how  many  thoufands  there 
be  in  -London  that  cannot  have  room  in  the  Parifh-Churches  and  theNon- 
conformifts  Churches  fet  together,  but  live  like  Atheifts. 

12,  Whether  he  acquainted  them  that  the  queftion  is,  whe- 
ther all  godly  diflenters  that  are  caft  out,  or  cannot  joyn  in  thePariflr 
way  of  Liturgick  Worfhip,  muft  (till  their  judgments  change)  give  o- 
Ter  all  publick  worfhip  of  God,  and  be  forfaken  of  all  Teachers  ? 

1 $.  Whether  he  acquainted  them,  how  loud  a  Call  we  had  to  preach 
in  London  fait  by  the  Plague,&  then  by  the  burning  of  the  Churches,the 
people  being deferted  by  the  Parifh  Minifters  in  thefe  fad  extremities  ? 

14.  Whether  he  acquainted  them  with  the  Kings  Licences,  and  our 
being  accufed  of  Schifm,  even  when  Licenfed  ? 

15.  Whether  he  acquainted  them  with  what  we  have  faid  for  our 
felves  lately  in  divers  Books  $  or  they  judg'd  us  unheard  ? 

16.  Whether  they  be  lingular?  or  whether  it  be  the  judgment  of  the 
Proteftant  Churches  in  France,  that  it  is  a  fin  for  any  to  preach  or  pub- 
Kckly  worfhip  God,  when  the  King,   Bifhops  and  Law  forbid  them  ? : 
And  if  fo,  How  long  it  hath  been  their  judgment  ?  and  why  all  their . 
Churches  ceafed  not  when  prohibited  ? 

If  not  fo,  How  to  know  that  our  filencing  Laws  and  Bilhops  muft  I 
be  obeyed,,  and  not  theirs  ? 

There  is  no  undgrftanding  their  anfwers,  till  we  know  how  the  cafe 
was  ftatod. 

§.  2.  Mr.  Clodes  Letter  is  moderate,  and  it's  like  they  took  the  ; 
cafe  to  be  about  proper  feparation,and  fo  fay  no  more  in  the  main  than 
fome  Nonconformifts  have  laid  againft  the  Brownifts.  But  the  Dr.  hath 
dealt  too  unmercifully  with  Mr.  Le  Maine  in  publifhing  his  Epiftle, 
when  it  was  fo  eafie  to  know  how  few,  if  any,  would  believe  his  ftory^  cr 
but  take  it  for  a  confirmation,  how  incredible  our  accufers  arc  ?  I  meah 
his  ftory  that  [_  five  .years  ago  he  heard  one  of  the  mofl  famous  Noncon- 
formifls  f  reach  in  a  place  where  were  three  men,  and  three  or  fourfcore  wo- 
men :  he  had  chofen  a  Text  about  the  building  up  the  ruins  of  Jerufaiem,*^ 
for  explication  cited  fclinny  and  Vitruvius  a  hundred  times,  &c~\  I  think 
1  fhall  never  fpeak  with  the  perfon  that  will  believe  him:  fure  I  am, 
ZWwknoweththattheNonconformiftsarefche  mofl:  averfe  to  fuch 
kind  of  Pf  eaching.    And  I  know  not  one  of  them  that  I  can  fey  ever 

read 


(  173  ) 

read  a  quarter  of  Vitruvim  :  I  confefs  I  never  read  a  leaf  of  him.  This 
Monfieur  would  do  well  to  tell  us  yet  the  name  of  the  man,  that  if  li- 
ving he  may  be  callM  to  account :  But  1  doubt  he  feil  into  fome  Taber- 
nacle, of  which  many  are  erefted  in  place  of  the  burnt  Churches,  ana 
perhaps  heard  the  Conformift  who  had  occafion  to  talk  of  archite&ure? 
But  yet  I  will  not  believe  that  either  Conformift  or  Nonconformift 
would  expofe  himfelf  .to  common  fcorn  by  an  hundred  or  twenty  fuch 
citations. 

§.  7,.  And  his  defcription  of  the  mens  horrible  impudence  to  excommu- 
nicate without  mercy  the  Churchy  &c.  imagining  that  they  are  the  only  men 
in  England,  nayintheChriflian  world  that  are  yredsfiinatsd  to  eternal  hap- 
pinefs,  &c.  and  then  pronouncing  them  intolerable,  fheweth  that  k:->  not 
us  that  he  fpeakcth  of,  nor  any  company  that  is  known  to  us,  neither 
our  Separatifts  here,  nor  Anabaptifts,  nor  fc  much  as  the  very  Qua- 
kers holding  any  fuch  thing. 

§.  4.  And  though  he  faith  [He  was  not  at  all  edified  by  the  Noncon- 
formift s  preaching,  it  followeth  not  that  no  others  are:  Nor  that 
none  were  edified  in  England  or  Scotland,  while  publick  Preachers  went 
theNonconformifts  way. 

§.  5.  But  becaufe  the  Doftor  chufeth  this  way,  I  will  imitate  him, 
though  with  the  Apology  that  St.  Paul  gloried,  and  give  him  notice 
of  fome  Epiftlesof  men  that  judged  otherwife  of  the  Nonconformifts. 


CHAP. 


C 174 ) 

CHAP.    XIV. 

Epiftles  or  Teftimomes  compared  with   the  Doffors, 
And  notes  on  Mr.  Jofcph  Glanvile's  Book>  called 
The  Zealous  Impartial  Proteftaxit,  with  a  Letter 
of  his  to  the  Author  heretofore  (and  a  Digreffion  of 
Doftor  L.  Moulin.) 

$.  1.  ¥Ngeneral,  he  that  will  read  the  Lives  of  many  of  the  old  Non- 
X  conformifts  (Hilderfliam,  Dod,  and  many  fuch,  and  Bifhop 
iM's  Character  of  Dr.  Reynolds,  and  the  late  publifhed  Lives  of  Mr. 
fofeph  Allen,  John  Janeway,  Dr.  Winter,  Mr.  Macham>  Mr.  Wadfaorth^ 
Mr.Stuhbsi  #?•)  will  fee  better  what  to  judge  of  them,  than  by  our 
three  French  Epiftles.  Yea  Thuanus  giveth  a  jufter  Character  of  ma- 
ny abroad  that  were  of  their  mind:  And  John  Fox  (one  of  them)  of 
more. 

$.  2.  And  to  our  three  Frenchmen,  I  will  when  it  will  be  of  more 
ufe  than  fetming  vanity,  return  you  four  French-mens  Letters  to  my 
felf,  (  Mr.  G aches y  Mr.  Amy raids,  Mr.  Le  Blanks,  and  Mr.  Teftards, 
(and  if  you  will  fome  Germans  too,  Calvinifts  and  Lutherans,)  of  a  quite 
differing  fenfe  of  us  Nonconformifts.  But  Mr.  G aches  being  already  in 
Print  (by  the  Duke  of  Landerdales  means)  1660.  and  j'oyned  with  one 
of  Mr.  V  Angles,  I  leave  the  Reader  that  defireth  to  fee  both. 

$.  3.  But  becaufe  Mr.  J  of.  Glanvile  was  one  of  themfelves  here 
(though  an  Origeniflja  mofl  triumphant  Conformift,  and  not  the  gen- 
tleit  contemner  of  Nonconformifts,  and  famous  for  his  great  wit,  I 
will  repay  the  Dr.  with  the  annexing  one  (among  many  Cince)  of  his 
Letters  to  my  (elf  ^  which  yet  indeed  1  do  not  chiefly  to  ballancethe 
Drs.  but  to  help  the  Reader  to  understand  Mr.  Glanvile  and  his  poft- 
humous  Book,  which  1  think  not  meet  to  pafs  by  without  fome  Anim- 
adverfions. 

Though  I  have  great  reafon  to  hope  that  dying  fo  fbon  after  it  and 
his  preferment,  the  experience  of  the  Vanity  of  a  flattering  World 
might  help  to  fa ve  him  from  impenitence.-  As  I  have  read  in  divers 
credible  writers,  it  waswithDr.>W<wJ!wy  Sntl\ffe\  that  on  his  Death- 
bed 


( 175,; 

bed  he  repented  that  he  had  written  fo  much  againfl:  the  Reformers 
called  Puritans, 

I  perceive  D.\  StH'wgflcet  marvelleth,  that  m/  own  expectations 
of  approaching  Death  do  not  hinder  me  from  writing  what  I  do  for 
the  Nonconformifts*,  whereas  the  truth  is,  had  not  pain  and  weaknefs 
kept  me  from  my  yoiuh  as  in  the  continual  profpeet  of  the  Grave  and 
the  next  life,  I  had  never  been  ;ike  to  have  been  fo  much  again/1  Con- 
formity, and  the  prefent  Difcip!  me  of  this  Church  (thatis,  theirwant 
of  Difcipline)  as  I  have  been  •,  For  the  World  might  have  more  flat- 
tered me  andbyafTed  my  judgment,  and  my  Confcience  might  have 
been  bolder  and  lefs  fearful  of  fin*,  And,  though  I  love  not  to  dif- 
pleafethem,  I  malt  fay  this  great  truth,  that  I  had  never  b:en  like 
to  have  lived  in  fo  convincing  fenfible  experience  of  the  great  diffe- 
rence of  the  main  body  of  the  Conformifts  from  themoft  of  the  Non- 
conformifts,  as  to  the  ferioufnefs  of  their  Chriftian  Faith,  and  hope 
and  practice,  their  vi&ory  over  the  flefh  and  world,  &c.  I  mean  both 
in  the  Clergy  and  Laity  of  mine  acquaintance!  O  how  great  a  diffe- 
rence have  1  found,  from  my  youth  to  this  day?  Though  I  doubt  not 
but  very  many  of  the  Paffive  Conformable  Minifters  f  to  fay  nothing 
of  the  lmpofersj  have  been  and  are  worthy  pious  men  *,  and  fuch 
as  would  not  perfwade  their  hearers,  thit  the  Jefuits  firfl  brought  in 
fpirituM  prayer:  And  I  had  the  great  bleffing  of  my  Education  near 
fome  fuch,  in  three  or  four  neighbour  Parifhes. 

§.  4.  It  grieved  me  to  hear  of  Mr.  GlanviWs  death,  for  he  was  2 
man  of  more  than  ordinary  ingeny,  and  he  was  about  a  Collection 
of  Hiftories  of  Apparitions,  which  is  a  work  of  great  ufe  againfl 
our  Sadducees,  and  to  ftabllfh  doubters,  and  the  beft  mans  faith  hath 
need  of  all  the  helps  from  fenfe  that  we  can  get :  And  I  feared  left  that 
work  had  perilhed.  with  him  ;  But  1  gladly  hear  that  by  the  care  of  Dr. 
//.  More  (that  worthy  faithful  man  of  peace,  who  never  fhidied  pre- 
ferment) it  is  both  preferred  and  augmented. 

And  as  for  his  Origenifme,  as  I  like  itnotT  folconfefs  in  matters 
of  that  nature,  I  can  better  bear  with  the  venturoufnefs  of  diflenters, 
than  hereticators  can  do. 

But  when  1  faw  this  Rag.  called  a  Letter  left  behind  him,  my  grief 
for  him  was  doubled:  And  1  faw  what  caufe  we  have  all  to  fear  the 
fnares  of  a  flattering  world,  and  what  caufe  to  pray  for  Divine  pre- 
fervation,  and  for  an  unbyafled  mind,  and  a-humble  fenfe  of  our  own 
frailty,  that  we  may  neither  over-value  profperity^  nor  our  own  under- 
{landings.  I  did 


(  17*  ) 

I  did  not  think  that  he  that  had  wrote  the  Vanity  of  Dogmatizing  could 
fo  foon  have  come  toperfwade  men  in  power,  that  diffenting  from 
Our  Churches  dogmatizing  and  impofed  words,  formes  and  ceremonies  was 
worthy  of  fo  ievere  a  profecution  of  us,  as  he  defcribeth :  and  that 
all  their  danger  is  from  the  forbearing  fuch  profecution  of  us^  and 
that  (though  for  their  own  ends  be  could  abate  us  fome  little  mat- 
ters,) the  only  way  to  fettled  peace  is  vigoroufly  to  execute  the  Laws 
againlt  us. 

He1  that  can  think  the  filencing,  and  imprifoning  of  about  2000  fuch 
Minifters,  is  the  way  to  bring  this  Land  to  Concord,  hath  fure  very 
hard  thoughts  of  them  incomparifon  of  Conformifts.  And  that  you 
may  fee  how  little  his  judgment  againlt  fuch  fhould  weigh  with  o- 
thers,  who  is  fo  lately  changed  from  himfelf,  1  will  give  you  here 
one  of  feveral  Letters  which  1  had  from  him,  and  leave  you  to  judge 
whether  he  have  proved  that  he  was  much  wifer  at  laft  than  when  he 
wrote  this?  or  whether  his  character  of  me  agree  with  his  motion  to 
filence  and  mine  all  fuch  ?  I  am  fo  far  from  owning  his  monftrous 
praifes,  that  1  fear  I  offended  him  with  fharply  rebuking  him 
for  them-  But  left  his  wit  and  virulence  here  do  harm,  I  give  it  you 
to  fhew  the  unconftancy  of  his  judgment;  or  if  he  would  have  ex- 
cepted me  from  his  feverities,  Imuftprofefs  that  /  believe  the  moft  of 
the  Tsfonconformable  Minifters  of  my  acquaint/wee  are  better  men  than  my 
/elf;  and  therefore  his  excefTive  praife  of  me,  is  the  condemnation  ana 
ihame  ofhis-perfecuting  counfel. 

§.  5.  As  to  his  praife  of  the  Bilhops  Writings  againft  Popery,  I 
had  rather  magnifiethan  obfeure  their  deferts:  But  I  am  not  able  to 
believe  that  the  old  ones  who  write  to  prove  the  Pope  Antichrift,  &c 
and  the  new  ones  who  would  bring  us  to  obey  him  as  Patriarch  of  the 
Weft  and  principium  nnitatis  Catholic*,  were  of  one  mind,  becaufe  both 
are  called  Proteftants,  and  that  fuch  asBifliop  Bramhall  and  the  reft 
of  the  defenders  of  Grotim,  were  of  the  fame  judgment  with  Bifhop 
Vfoer,  Bifhop  Morton,  Bifhop  Downtime,  &c.  nor  that  Grotius,  who 
defcribeth  a  Papift  to  be  one  thatfiattereth  Topes  as  if  all  were  right  which 
they  J aid  and  did,  did  difclaim  Popery  in  the  fame  fenfe  as  the  old 
Church  of  Englanddid.  Two  men  may  cry  down  Popery,  while  one 
of  them  is  a  Papift  or  near  one  in  the  others  fenfe. 

As  to  the  folly  of  calling  that  Popery  which  is  not,  I  have  faid 
more  againft  it  in  my  Cath.  Theologie  than  he  hath  done. 

And  as  tc  his  excufe  of  an  ignorant  vicious  fort  of  Minifters  be- 
caufe no  better  will  take  fmall  Liv-ings  J  It  is  not  true;  Xhefilenced 

Noncon- 


(  177  ) 

Nonconformifts  would  have  been  glad  of  them,  or  to  have  preached 
there  for  nothing .-  The  tolerating  of  ignorant  fcandalous  men  were 
more  excufable,  if  better  were  not  fhut  out  that  would  have  taken 
fuch  places.  But  it's  notorious  that  for  the  intereft  of  their  faction 
and  prosperity,  they  had  rather  have  the  ignorant  and  vicious,  than 
the  ableft  and  moft  laborious  Nonconformift ;  Bifhop  Morley  told  me, 
when  he  forbad  me  to  preach,  that  It  was  better  for  a  place  to  have 
none,  than  to  have  me;  when  I  askt  him,  Whether  I  might  not  be  Suffered 
in  fome  place  which  no  one  elfe  will  take-'}  Moft  of  the  old  Nonconform  ifts 
were  fuffered  by  connivance  in  fmall  obfcure  places,  which  was  the 
chief  reafon  why  they  fet  not  up  other  meetings,  which  Dr.  Sul- 
lingfieet  thought  they  avoided  as  unlawful,  becaufe  forbidden. 

§.6.  And  as  to  his  excufe  by  blaming  ill  Patrons,  I  would  know  then 
by  what  true  obligation  all  men  in  England  are  bound  to  commit 
the  Paltoral  conduct  of  their  Souls  to  fuch  men  only  as  our  English 
Patrons  chufe  f 

§.  7.  And  when  he  fo  blameth  the  tepidity  and  irreligioufnefs 
of  the  Members  of  their  own  Church,  I  would  know,  1.  Whether  all 
men  that  are  more  ferioufly  religious  mult  be  forfaken  by  us,  and 
ruined  by  them,  if  they  be  not  of  their  mind  and  form  ?  2.  And 
whether  tfee  numbers  of  the  irreligious  that  are  for  their  way,  and 
the  numbers  of  the  religious  that  are  againft  it,  fhould  not  rather 
breed  fome  fufpicion  in  them,  than  engage  them  to  ruine  fo  many 
fuch  men. 

$.  8.  And  when  page  $.  he  confefTeththattheywW  is  their  Chur- 
ches ftrength  and  Government,  and  how  contemptible  words,  paper,  ar- 
guments and  excommunications  are  without  force  *,  doth  he  not  fhame  their 
whole  caufe,  and  (hew  that  it  is  not  the  fame  Government  which  the 
Church  ufed  for  many  hundred  years,  which  they  defire  ?  and  that 
their  whole  power  of  the  Keys  which  they  talk  fo  much  for,  feems 
tothemfelvesadeadanduneffectual  thing?  while  we  Nonconformifts 
defire  no  coercive  power,  but  to  guide  Confenters. 

J.  9.  As  to  his  project  to  fave  religion  under  a  Papift  King, 
if  the  Dean  and  Chapter  may  but  chufe  the  Bifhop,  I  leave  it  to  0- 
ther  mens  confideration- 
*  But  I  give  you  his  Letter  to  me,  becaufe  page  34.  He  frith, 
{The  greatefi  part  of  thofe  that  now  fcatter  and  run  about  do  it  out  of 
Humour  or  Fancy,  or  Faction,  or  Interefl,  or  Animofity,  or  defire  of  being 
counted  godly,  not  really  out  of  Confcience  and  Conviction  of  duty :  and 
theft  the  penalties  duly  exacted woula (bring  bacl^  (with  much  more  fharp 

A  a  and 


(  i?8  ) 

and  cruel,)  As  if  he  knew  the  confciences  of  the  molt  .*   But  fee  how 
much  otherwife  he  lately  thought  of  fome. 

Agapetus  Diacott.  ad  Juftiitian.  Adhort.  cap.  j  J.  {Epifcopls  vi  &  gladio 
invitos  regent ibut  qnam  Regibus  magis  congrna.'} 

NOmIZe  7m  $&7iKivuv  a<r$cLk6)(,  ontr  Wwtw  ak<*wh;  rff  dr&§cl7rzov>  &£+ 
Exiftima  tunc  regnare  te  tuto,  cum  volentibus  imperas  ho minibus.  Qued 
enim  invito  fubjicitury  [edit tones  molitur ,  capta  occafione*  Quod  vero 
vinculis  benevolentia  tenetur,  fir  mam  fervat  erga  tenentem  obfervantiam. 

i  Pet.  5.  1,2,  3,4.  The  Elders  which  are  AMONG  you  I  exhort, 
who  amalfo  an  Elder  and  awitnefs  of  the  J Offerings  of  Chrift,  and  alfo  a 
partaker  of  the  Glory  that  Jhall  be  revealed.  Feed  the  Flock^of  God  which 
is  among  yotty  taking  the  overfight  thereof,  not  by  conflraint  but  willing- 
ly -,  Net  for  FILTHY  LVCREy  but  of  a  ready  mind :  Neither  as  being 
Lords  over  Gods  heritage,  but  being  enf ample s  to  the  Flocks  And  when  the 
chief  Shepherd  Jhall  appear,  ye  fhaU  receive  a  Crown  of  Glory  that  fadetk 
not  away. 2    See  Dr.  Hammond  on  the  Text. 


Ut.Glath 


(  ^79  ) 
Mr.  Glanviles  Letter. 


Reverend  and  moft 
Honoured  S*r, 


c 


I  Have  often  taken  my  pen  in  hand  with  a  defign  to  fignifie  to  you, 
how  much  I  love  and  honour  fo  much  learning,  piety,  and  ex- 
emplary goodnefs  as  you  are  owner  of  \  And  how  paffionately  defi- 
4  rous  I  have  been,  and  am,  to  be  known  to  a  perfon  with  whom  none 
'hatha  like  place  in  my  higheft  efteem  and  value:  But  my  affecti- 
ons andrefpects  dill  growing  infinitely  too  big  for  mine  expreffion, 
4  I  thought  J  ihould  but  difparage  them,  by  going  about  to  reprefent 
4  chem.  And  when  I  fate  down  toconfider,  how  I  might  moft  advan- 
4  tagioufly  fet  forth  my  regards,  and  high  fenfc  of  your  great  deferts,  I 
4  always  found  my  felf  confounded  with  fubject.  And  the  throng  of  mine 
4  affections,  each  of  them  impatient  to  be  firft  upon  my  paper,hindred 
4  one  another's  gratification.  Great  paffions  are  difficultly  fpoken  : 
4  And  1  find  my  felf  now  fo  pained  with  the  fenfe  that  I  cannot  write 
4  futeably  to  the  honour  I  have  for  you,that  I  can  force  forbear  throw- 

*  ing  away  my  pen  *,  being  near  concluding,  that  'tis  better  to  fpeak 

*  nothing  in  fuch  a  fubject,  than  a  little.   But  when  I  confider  you  as 
4  a  perfon  that  have  high  affections  for  thofe  excellent  qualification?, 
4  which  in  the  higheft  degree  are  your  poffeflion,  and  futeably  refent 
4  the  worth  of  thofe  that  own  them  •,  I  am  incouragM  to  think  that 
'you  may  conceive  how  I  honour  you  (though  my  pen  cannot  tell  it 
4  you)  by  reflecting  upon  your  own  eftimateof  thofe,  that  are  of  the 
4  higheft  form  of  learning,  parts,  and  exemplary  piety  \   or,  more 
4  compendioufly,  fuch  in  your  judgment,   as  1  take  you  for,  Incompa- 
rable.    And  yet  I  have  a  jealoufie  that  that  will  not  reach  if,   for 
4  though  1  think  your  judicious  efteem  of  fuch,  cannot  be  furpafTed  ^ 
4  yet  I  am  apt  to  think,  that  none  ever  got  fuch  an  intereft,  and  ho'd 
4  upon  your  paffions,  as  hath  the  object  of  my  admiration,  on  mine. 
4  Nor  yet  can  1  rebuke  them  as  extravagant,  though  at  the  higheft,  fince 
4  they  take  part  with  my  fevereft  judgment,  and  were  indeed  inflamed 
4  by  it.     And  Iprofefs  I  never  found  my  felf  fo  dearly  inclio'd  to  thofe 
4  of  my  neareft  blood,  or  fo  affectionately  concern'd  for  my  moft  be- 
4  loved  friends  and  acquaintance,  as  for  you,  whom  I  had  never  the 
'happinefstoconverfewichbutin  your  excellent  writings,  nor  ever 

A  a  2  4  often 


(i8o  ) 

4often  faw,  but  in  the  Pulpit.  Yea,  I  fpeak  unfeignedly,  Ihaveal- 
4  ways  interefled  my  feif  more  in  your  vindication  when  your  unrea- 
4  fonable  prejudiced  enemies  have  malign' d  you ,  and  delighted  my 
4felf  more  inyourjullpraifes  from  thofethat  know  you,  than  ever 
4  my  felf-love  or  ambition  could  prompt  me  to  do  in  any  cafe  of 
1  mine  own.   Sir,  I  hope  you  believe  that  I  fpeak  my  moll  real  fenti- 

*  ments,  and  do  not  go  about  to  complement  you.  For  I  mull:  be  very 
4  weak  and  inconfiderate,  did  I  think  to  recommend  my  felf  to  fo  much 
4  ferious  wifdom,  by  fuch  childifh  fooleries.  Therefore  ifmyexpref- 
4  fions  favour  any  thing  above  common  refpeft,  I  befeech  you  to  be- 
4  lieve,  'tis  for  that  their  caufe  is  not  common  ^  but  as  much  above 
4  ordinary,  as  their  ofyeft.  I  know  your  humility  and  remarkable 
4  felf-denyal  will  not  bear  to  read,  what  1  cannot  but  fpeak,  as  of- 

*  ten  as  I  have  occafion  to  mention  your  great  worth  and  merits.  How- 
4  ever  I  cannot  chufe  but  here  acknowledge,  how  much  I  am  a  debtor 
ctoyour  incomparable  writings.  In  which,  when  you  deal  in  pra&i- 
4cal  fubje&s,  I  admire  your  affectionate,  piercing,  heart-affe&ing 
4  quicknefs :  And  that  experimental,  fearching,  folid,  convi&ive  way 
4  of  fpeaking,  which  are  your  peculiars  *,  for  there  is  a  fmartnefs  ac- 

*  companying  your  pen  that  forces  what  you  write  into  the  heart,  by 
4  a  fweet  kind  of  irrefiflable  violence  *,  which  is  fo  proper  to  your  fe- 
4  rious  way,  that  1  never  met  it  equal'd  in  any  other  writings.  And 
c  therefore  I  cannot  read  them  without  an  elevation,  and  emotions 
4  which  I  feldom  feel  in  other  perufals.  And  when  you  are  ingag'd  in 
4  do&rinaland  controverfal  matters,  I  no  lefs  apprehend  in  them  your 
4 peculiar  excellencies.  Ifindaftrength,  depth,  concinnity,  and  cohe- 
4  rence  in  your  notions,  which  are  not  commonly  elfewhere  met  with- 
4  all.  And  you  have  no  Jefs  power  by  your  triumphant  reafon  upon 
1  the  judgments  of  capable,  free  inquirers  *,  than  you  have  upon  their 

*  afFe&ions  and  confeiences  in  your  devotional  and  practical  difcour- 
4  fes.    And  methinks  there  is  a  force  in  your  way  .of  arguing,  which  o~ 

*  verpowers  oppofition.  Among  your  excellent  Treatifes  of  this  na- 
ture, your  Rational  confirmation  of  that  grand  principle  of  our  Re- 

*  ligion,  the  Sacred  Authority  of  Scripture  *,  your  folid  dependent  no- 
tions in  the  bufinefs  of  j unification,  and  your  ftriking  at  the  Root  of 
4  Antinomianifm  in  them,  which  I  look  on  as  the  canker  of  Chriftiani- 

*  ty,  and  have  always  abhorrM  as  thefhadow  of  death  ;  And  your  ex- 
cellent Catholick,  healing  indeavours*,  Thefe  I  fay,  deferve  from 
4  me  particular  acknowledgments.  I  profefs  theloofe,  impertinent,' 
'  unfound,  cobweb  arguings  of  the  moll  that  I  had  met  with  in  the 

4  Mat- 


(  i8i  ) 

4  Matter  of  the  Divine  Authority  of  Scripture,  had  almoft  occafioned 
4  my  (tumbling  at  the  threfhold,  in  my  inquiries  into  the  grounds  of 
4  my  Religion.  For  I  am  not  apt  to  rely  on  an  implicit  faith  in  things 
4  of  this  moment.  But  your  performances  in  this  kind  brought  relief 
4  to  my  ftaggering  judgment,  and  triumph' t  over  my  hefitancy.  As 
4  they  did  alfo  to  an  excellent  perfon  a  friend  of  mine,  who  was  fha- 
4  ken  on  the  fame  accountsthat  I  was.  And  we  are  both  no  lefs  ob- 
liged by  what  you  have  done  in  the  other  things  formentioned.  V, 
4  Iprofefs  1  judge  fo  rational,  that  I  cannot  but  wonder,  almoft  to 
4ftupor,  to  behold  the  fierce,  though  feeble  onfets  of  your  cankerM 
4  fiery  opponents;  whofe  writings  againlt  you  fmoft  of  them)  feem 
c  to  me  to  be  indited  by  nothing  but  fpleen  and  choler.  Nor  have  I 
'been  able  to  afcribe  the  ingaging  of  fo  many  virulent  pens  againft 
4  you,  to  any  other^caufe  than  the  indeavours  of  Satan  to  hinder  the 

*  fuccefs  which  your  powerful  pen  hath  had  againft  the  Dark  Kingdom. 
4  And  the  fpirit  that  I  have  perceiv'd  to  animate  fome  of  their  wild 
4  ravings  hath  confirmed  me  in  that  belief,  that  it  was  the  great  Abad- 
'  don  that  infpir'd  their  undertakings.  1  thought  e're  this  to  have  gi- 
4  ven  you  a  more  pubiick  fpecimen  of  mine  affections  by  indeavour- 

*  ingfomewhat  in  your  vindication  againfl:  the  calumnies,  and  feeble 
4  arguings  of  fome  of  thofe  fiery  Afiailants  \  But  colhteral  occafions, 
-c  and  other  ftudies  have  hitherto  diverted  me :  Yet  I  fhall  not  forget 
*■  my  obligations,  aflbon  as  I  can  be  mafter  of  convenient  time  and 
c  opportunities  for  the  performance.  But  I  fee  my  paper  warns  me  •, 
4  And  though  /fhouldpleafe  my  felf  by  a  larger  expreflion  of  my  re- 
4  fpects,  and  fenfe  of  your  high  defervings  from  every  one  that  hath 

*  had  the  happinefs  to  be  taught  by  you,  either  from  the  Prefs  or  Pul- 
4  pit ;  yet  /  dare  not  be  fo  rude  inthisfirft  Addrefs,  as  to  betrou- 
'  biefome  and  importunate.  /  know  your  occafions  are  fucb,  as  that 
4  they  cannot  bear  a  long  divertifement.  I  had  feveral  times  defign'd 
4  at  London  to  have  taken  the  boldnefs  to  have  waited  on  you,  but  the 
4  confideration,  how  you  were  conftantly  ingagM  inbufinefs,  prevent- 
4ed  the  execution  of  thofe  intentions.  And  about  three  years  fince 
4 1  came  from  Oxford  on  purpofe  to  Kederminjler^  to  fee  you  there, 
4  and  hear  you  preach  j  both  which  I  was  happy  in.  But  you  were  then 
'  fo  bufie  in  the  company  of  feveral  Minifters  that  were  at  your  houfe, 
4  that  I  could  not  gain  an  opportunity  of  making  way  for  a  future  ac- 
quaintance. If  I  were  fure  that  you  were  lefs  incumbred  now,  and 
'  that  you  made  any  confiderable  ftay  in  the  Country,  I  would  make  a 
4  journey  on  purpofe  to  wait  on  you.    I  have  with  this  fent  you  r.  fmall 

'Dif- 


(i82) 

Difcourfeof  mfneown,  of  which  I  defire  your  acceptance.  For  the 
fubject  and  defign,  I  know  it  will  not  difpleafe  you.  And  for  the 
management,  I'me  confident  you  will  not  quarrel  with  it,  becaufeit 
is  not  lb  popular  as  it  might  have  been, when  you  (hall  know,that  'twas 
intended  for  thofe  of  a  Philofophick  Genius.  I  durft  not  (Sir,)  be 
any  longer  troublefbme,  and  therefore  fhall  conclude  with  this  pro- 
feffion,  that  the  freedom  of  your  fpirit,  the  impartiality  of  your  in- 
quiries,  the  Catholicknefs  of  your  judgment  and  affections,  the 
peaceablenefs,  and  moderation  of  your  principles,  the  generolity 
and  publick  fpiritednefs  of  your  difpofitton,  the  exact,  uniform  bo- 
linefs  of  your  life,  and  your  indefatigable  induftry  for  the  good  of 
fouls,  excellencies  which  I  never  knew  fo  coinbinM  in  one ;  have  fo 
endear'd  you  to  me,  that  there  is  not  that  perfon  breathing  that  hath 
fuch  a  ihare  in  the  affections,  and  higheft  value  of, 

Afoft  excellent  5/r, 
tne   of  the  meanefl,    though  tnoft  Jim ere •, 
of  your  a f eft  tonate  lovers,  and  admirer st 
Sept.  1.61. 


Jof  GlanvilL 


CHAP. 


CHAP.    XV. 

Seme  Notes  on  the  Book,  called  the  Lively  Pi&ureo/ 
Dr.  Lud.  Moulin  3  and  his  Repentance  fubferibed 
hy  Dr.  Simon  Patrick,  Dean  of  Peterborough,  and 
Dr.  Gilb.  Burnet. 

§.  1.  T  Had  tavken  no  notice  of  this  Book,  had  not  the  Author  by 
J.  citing  my  words  againft  Dr.  L.  Moulin^  juftifying  his  Cha- 
ra&er,made  me  a  party.  Therefore  I  (hall  impartially  fpiak  my  judg- 
ment of  him  and  the  accufation,  left  I  be  thought  to  own  all  that  the 
Waiter  fpeaketh  of  him,  andfotobeasguiltyofuncharitablenefsas  he 
feemtth  to  me  to  be.  I  honour  the  name  for  the  fake  of  his  famous 
Father,  and  his  worthy  Brother  Peter,  yet  living,  who  by  his  Anfwer 
to  Philanax  Anglicus,  &c.  hath  well  deferved  of  all  Proteftants  :  And 
his  worthy  Brother  Cyrus,  and  his  very  worthy  Son  now  dead  :  And 
1  truly  believe  that  Dr.  Lewis  was  a  fincere  honeft- hearted  man, 
though  Dr.  Stilling fleet  teem  to  diflike  my  giving  him  that  title.  And 
I  will  tell  you  why  I  think  fo. 

§.  2.  I  ever  obferved  that  his  faults  lay  in  his  weaknefs,  and  not 
in  wickednefs:  1.  He  was  not  a  man  of  an  accurate  diftinguifhing 
head,  and  fo  was  apt  to  take  verbal  Controverfies  for  real.  2.  And 
it  was  no  fingular  thing  in  him,  that  hereby  he  was  led  by  the  authori- 
ties which  he  moft  valued,  to  think  that  the  differences  between  the 
RemonftrantsandContra-remonftrants  were  much  greater  than  they 
are,  and  Arminianifm  as  it  was  called,  to  be  a  more  heinous  thing  than 
indeed  it  is.  $.  And  whenhe  thought  that  God's  Caufe  fas  Bmdxvar- 
dine  called  it)  was  fo  deeply  engaged  againft  fuch  Opinions,  who 
can  wonder  if  be  was  zealous  againft  them  ?  4-  And  then  he  had  a  hafty 
raflmefs  in  fpeaking  what  he  thought  was  true  and  necefTary,  when 
fometimesit  was  not  well  tryed,  and  fometime  it  was  in  an  imprudent 
manner  and  time  :  And  fo  in  his  haft  ran  into  the  temerities  and  mifc 
takes  which  Mr.  DaiHe  and  1  did  blame  him  for.  But  I  never  percei- 
ved that  he  had  more  jaffion  (much  his  fury)  than  other  ordinary  dif- 
puters,  but  a  more  rafh  and  bluftering  way  of  uttering  his  mind,  fome- 
times  and  in  fome  Cafes,  where  he  thought  Religion  much  concerned. 
He  had  fo  fervent  a  love  to  truth,  that  he  fometime  rufht  upon  miftakes 

that 


f  1*4} 

that  wore  the  vizor  of  it,  and  then  truth  Creator  fuppofed)  whatever 
it  coft  him  he  would  fpeak.  5.  I  ever  obferved  it  was  in  his  too  ex- 
treme oppofition  to  fomereal  errour  or  crime,  that  he  was  carried 
into  his  temerities.  6.  And  I  never  found  that  he  was  a  worldling, 
nor  finned  by  the  preference  of  worldly  intereftj  Anddoubtlefs  the 
love  of  worldly  profits,  honours  and  pleafures*  are  more  dangerouf- 
ly*  contrary  to  the  love  of  God,  than  fome  fafli  uncharitable  words 
and  cenfures  in  a  Caufe  which  he  thought  was  Gods. 

§.  3.  Yea  I  found  him  more  patient  of  confutation,  contradiction 
and  reproof  than  moft  men  that  ever  I  difputed  with,  his  Zeal  which 
you  call  fury  being  far  more  for  God  than  for  himfelf.  I  began  with 
him  about  24  years  ago,  confuting  his  Latine  Book  of  Juftification  a- 
gainft  his  Brother  Cyrus.  I  wrote  a  fecond  time  againft  him  in  the 
Preface  cited  by  his  Pitture-drawer,  about  Univerfal  Redemption, 
f  and  had  faid  much  more  in  a  Book  of  Univerfal  Redemption,  going 
to  the  Prefs,  which  I  caft  by  becaufe  Mr.  Dailies  came  then  out, 
which  had  the  fame  teftimonial  part  and  more  which  I  intended.)  Yet 
I  never  heard  that  the  Dr.  gave  me  any  uncivil  or  uncharitable  word, 
nor  did  he  ever  reply  to  either  of  thefe  Books  ^  nor  fignified  any  abate- 
ment of  his  love.    And  I  think  this  fhewed  a  forgiving  mind. 

f.  4.  But  it's  intimated,  that  this  was  becaufe  we  agreed  in  other 
things?  I  anfwer,  we  disagreed  alfo  even  about  Church-Govern- 
ment, which  was  the  dividing  Controverfie  of  thofe  times.  The  Dr. 
was  zealous  for  the  Magiftrates  Power  in  Er*ft*u  fenfe,  and  went  ra- 
ther further  than  Dr.  Stillingfreet  in  his  Irenicum  :  And  as  I  was  before 
againft  him,  fo  after  this,  about  12  years  ago,  I  wrote  that  Book  a- 
gainft  him  about  the  Magiftrates  Power  in  Church-matters,  in  which  I 
called  him  Myfmcere  friend,  thinking  [metre  friendly  confiftent  with 
iuch  a  difference  and  an  open  Confutation.  (And  if  the  contrary  muft 
be  repented  of,  I  hope  fuch  charity  is  no  crime.)  This  third  Booka- 
gainfthimalfohe  took  patiently,  and  without  breach  of  Love. 

And  when  I  laboured  to  perfwade  him  to  retract  his  Writings  a- 
gainft  Excommunication,  though  he  held  ftill  to  his  Conclufion,  and 
thought  that  the  great  work  that  God  called  him  to  in  the  World, 
was  to  difcover  the  Papal  and  PrelaticalUfurpation  of  the  Magiftrates 
power  under  the  name  of  Ecclefiaftical,  yet  I  made  him  coniefs  all  the 
matter  that  I  pleaded  for,  and  he  made  me  fee  that  his  errour  lay 
moft  in  meer  ambiguous  words>  which  he  had  not  accuratenefs  enough 
to  explicate.  Ail  this  patience  fignified  not  uncharitablenefs,  rage  or 
fury.    And  1  obliged  him  not  by  benefits  or  praife,  but  ufually  chid 

him 


(  iBs) 

him  for  his  eagernefs  for  his  own  indigefted  conceptions  \  nor  gave 
him  any  thanks  for  his  indifcreet  and  exeeffive  praifes  afterwards  given 
me  in  his  Patronusbona  ftdei.  Upon  all  this  I  would  put  fome  quefti- 
ons  to  the  fober  thoughts  of  the  Author  of  his  Picture. 

i.  Whether  there  be  not  as  great  figns  of  fmcerhy,  humility  and 
patience  in  fuch  a  behaviour,  and  in  that  great  love  which  he  had  to 
all  that  he  thought  Godly  men,  (though  he  too  hardly  judged  of  o- 
thers  for  that  which  he  thought  great  errour  and  fin)  as  in  thofe  than 
cannot  bear  a  juft  defence  of  diflenters  agsinft  their  unjuft  accufa- 
tions,  nor  endure  men  to  tell  why  they  rather  naffer  than  Conform. 

2.  Whether  he  that  maketh  him  fo  very 
bad  a  man  *  and  incredible  a  lyar  for  too  *P*gttx  A  win-Writo 
rafh  cenforioufhefs  of  diflenters,  and  fome  am?  ^^T'  i{  nozu  maf! 
untruths  vented  in  rafh  zeal,  do  not  tempt  Z£^%u*£% 
men  to  give  as  odious  titles  to  thofe  Reverend  men,  if  they  be  of  his  mind, 
perfons  who  go  very  far  beyond  him  in  un-  and  vilific  the  beftif  they  be 
truths  and  uncharitable  cenfures?  And  w he-  of  another,  p.  27.  He  hath 
ther  they  that  were  for  the  filencing  and  ut-  SUS3*  A Sfc£ 
ter  ruining  or  about  2000  Minilters,  and  nies:  with  more  fuch. 
call'd  to  Magiflrates  to  execute  the  Laws 

againft  them,  and  that  unchurch  all  the  Reformed  Churches  which 
have  not  a  continued  fucceflion  of  Diocefan  B.fhops  7  (hew,  not  as 
much  uncharitablenefs  as  he  did  that  defcribed  fome  too  hardly  ? 
And  whether  moflofthe  Books  written  againft  me  by  Conformifts, 
(fuch  as  the  Bifhop  of  Wore  eft  er^s  Letter,  the  Impleader,  Mr.  Hinlehy, 
and  many  morej  be  not  much  fuller  of  untruths  in  matter  of  fact 
than  the  Drs?  But  yet  I  think  it  a  fin  to  give  them  fuch  a"  Character 
as  this,  and  render  the  perfons  as  incredible  lyars,  becaufe  errour,  in- 
tereft  and  faction  made  fome  fo  unadvifed. 

3.  If  it  deferve  fuch  a  Character  to  cenfure  Arminians  as  dangerouf- 
ly  erroneous  and  befriending  Popery  ?  whether  you  do  not  confe- 
quently  fo  ltigmatize  the  old  Church  of  England,  before  Bifhop  Laud's 
time?  Even  Arch-bifhop  Whitgift,  Bifhop  Fletcher,  and  the  reft  who 
drew  up  the  Lambeth  Articles,  Arch  bifhop  Abbot  and  the  Church  in 
his  time  (except  fix  Bifhops,  &o)  King  James,  and  the  whole  Church 
asconfenting  by  fix  Delegates  to  the  Synod  of  Dort :  And  alfo  that 
Synod  and  all  the  Forein  Reformed  Churches  that  conferred  to  it? 
And  is  not  this  more  than  Dr.  Moulin  did  ? 

4-  And  are  they  not  then  to  be  accordingly  ftigmatized,  who  on 
the  other  fide  make  the  Calvinifts  as  odious,  accufing  them  of  Blafphe- 

B  b  my, 


my,  Turcifme,  and  doing  as  much  againft  them  as  Dr.  Heylin  in  the 
Life  of  Arch-bifhop  Laud  tells  us  was  done  in  England  on  that 
account. 

5.  And  if  iuch  hard  thoughts  of  Arminians  as  furthering  Popery 
deferve  your  Charadter,  whether  by  confequence  you  fo  brand  not  all 
thofe  Parliaments  who  voted  againft  it  accordingly,  and  made  it  one 
of  the  dangerous  grievances  of  the  Land?  And  is  not  that  as  faulty 
as  for  Dr.  Moulin  too  much  to  blame  you  ? 

6.  Yea  I  doubt  you  ftigmatize  thus  fo  great  a  part  of  Chriftians 
in  all  the  World  as  I  am  loth  to  mention :  fo  rare  is  it  to  hear  of  any 
Country,  where  they  are  not  fo  much  guilty  of  feds  and  factions,  as 
by  education  and  intereft  to  run  in  a  ftream  of  uncharitable  cenfures 
of  one  another,  fpeaking  evil  of  more  than  they  underftand,  as  1  have 
proved  in  my  Cathol.  Theolog.  about  this  fubject. 

7.  Seeing  it  is  above  20  years  fince  I  wrote  that  againft  Dr.  Moulin 
which  you  cite,  and  he  never  found  fault  with  it,  nor  juftified  his  mi- 
ftakes,  may  1  not  think  that  he  was  convinced  and  repented  ?  And  you 
that  praife  his  death-bed  repentance,  fhould  not  Characterize  him  by 
failings  twenty  years  repented  of  ? 

8.  How  do  you  know  that  the  Dr.  repented  not  of  his  too  hard 
words  of  you  till  his  death-bed  ?  You  are  miftaken?  In  his  health  I 
more  than  once  blamed  him,  1.  For  his  cenfure  of  Dr.  Stillingfleet  and 
the  other  particular  perfons,  whofe  worth  was  known,  and  had  de- 
fended well  of  the  Proteftant  Churches  ^  2.  For  his  extending  thofe 
cenfures  to  the  Conformifts  and  Church  which  belong  to  fome  parti-, 
cular  perfons,  and  the  molt  are  not  guilty  of,  And  3.  For  his  Book  of 
the  fewnefs  of  the  faved,  as  prefumptuous :  And  as  far  as  I  could 
then  difcern  he  repented  of  them  all,  but  laid  the  ill  Title-page  of  the 
lafton  the  Book-felier  :  And  he  ftill  thought  of  Caufes  and  Parties  as 
very  different,  he  owned  not  his  harfh  words  or  cenfures  aforefaid. 
I  found  him  not  raging  nor  impenitent. 

9.  Doth  not  your  own  defcription  of  his  great  readinefs  to  beg  for- 
givenefs,  andlothnefs  to  own  anything  uncharitable,  fhewa  better 
fpiritthan  your  pitture  doth  defcribe  ? 

10.  Is  not  he  as  like  to  be  a  fincere  man  who  aaketh  forgivenefs  of 
his  faults  fralh  cenfures  and  words)  as  he  that  repenteth  of  his  for- 
mer duties,  his  Pacificatory  principles  and  Writings.  Surely  to  re- 
pent of  evil  is  a  better  fign  than  to  repent  of  good- 

1 1.  Becaufe  you  call  us  to  acquit  our  felves  by  difowning  Dr.  Mou- 
lin, may  we  not  difown  both  his  faults  and  our  own,  without  difown- 
ing 


C  i«7  ) 

ing  God's  grace  and  mens  piety  and  worth  ?  would  you  be  fo  dif- 
ownedfor  your  own  faults?  2.  And  how  fhouid  Idifown  hisrafhnefs 
better  than  to  write  what  I  wrote  againfthim,  and  fay  what  I  faid  to 
him  ?  would  you  have  a  Synod  called  to  reprove  every  rafh  word  ? 

12.  Bccaufe  you  juftly  value  mens  repentance,  I  will  be  thankful  to 
you  to  further  mine,  and  give  me  leave  to  further  yours.  Only  1  fore- 
tell you  that  your  words  (hall  not  offend  me  by  their  hardnefst  if  they 
have  but  truth,  and  you  call  me  to  repent  of  my  fin  and  not  of  ferving 
God.  I  do  not  repent  of  defending  Truth  and  Duty  :  nor  of  feeking 
to  fave  the  Reader  from  the  infection  of  falfe  accufation  and  arguings 
which  would  deftroy  his  charity  and  innocency,  by  the  fulleft  mani- 
fefting  the  faljhood  and  evil  of  the  words  and  deeds  which  are  the  In- 
ftruments-  1  take  it  to  be  a  wrong  to  thofe  that  I  would  preferve, 
to  extenuate  the  danger  of  the  fnare  or  poyfon,  on  pretence  of  gen- 
tlenefs  to  the  Writer.  But  I  deal  with  the  Caufe  and  defire  none  to  hate 
the  perfon ;  nor  would  1  diminifli  the  honour  due  to  him  for  his  parts 
orvertuesj  but  rather  have  all  men  love  and  magnifie  all  the  good, 
while  they  diflike  the  evil \  and  would  fave  the  Reader  at  as  eafie  a  rate 
to  the  Writer  as  I  can  .•  But  thathefhould  not  be  related  to  his  falfe 
orfinful  words  or  deeds  is  not  in  my  power  to  effe&.  But  though  I 
repent  not  of  neceflary  truth,  if  I  any  where  miftake ,  or  fpeak 
more  truth  than  is  profitable,  or  in  language  by  fharpnefs  more  apt  to 
do  hurt  than  good,  of  this  1  repent,  and  ask  forgivenefs  of  God  and 
man  *,  As  I  do  if  I  fpeak  fo  fhort  of  truth,  as  with  Eli  to  make  fin 
feem  fmaller  than  it  is. 

And  now  I  hope  you  will  lore  your  own  duty  of  Repentance  better 
than  another  mans,  and  will  not  be  angry  if  1  feekto  help  it. 

1.  Do  you  not  perceive  that  while  you  paint  the  Dr.  as  an  incredi- 
ble raging  diffracted  lyar,  and  praife  his  repentance  for  rafo  words 
of  others,  that  you  commit  the  fame  rafhnefs  your  felf  againft  him  ? 
If  you  cannot  fee  your  own  face,  let  any  impartial  Reader  be  your 
glafs,  and  ask  him  whether  you  do  not  that  which  you  are  condemn- 
ing? 

2.  You  feem  to  vindicate  the  Book  called  the  Friendly  Debate,  I 
fhall  (hortly  further  tell  you  of  fomewhat  in  it  to  be  repented  of.  And 
if  partiality  made  not  repentance  a  very  difficult  work  you  would  have 
no  need  herein  of  a  Monitor.  But  you  may  think  me  partial,  though 
I  acknowledg  your  civilities  tome.*  I  can  (hew  you  a  Manufcript  of 
one  both  impartial  an  j  truly  judicious,  even  the  late  Judge  Hale,  cx- 
prefling  fo  great  diflike  of  that  Debate  and  theEccl.  Policy,  as  tend- 

Bb  2  ing 


C  188 ; 

mg  to  the  injury  of  Religion  it  felf,  that  he  wifheth  the  Authors 
would  openly  profefs  that  they  write  for  themfelves,  and  no  more  fo 
abufively  pretend  it  is  for  Religion. 

3.  You  fay  in  this  Picture  that  [IfL.  du  Moulin  had  that  honefl  zeal 
inhhnto  which  he  pretends,  he  would  have  handled  Mr.  Baxter  a*  fmart- 
ly,  &c. 

Anfw.  There  may  be  other  reafons  than  want  of  honefl  zeal:  But  do 
you  not  here  (hew  that  it  is  the  perfons  more  than  his  aft  that  offended 
you  in  his  reproof?  Could  you  judge  it  honefl  zeal  had  it  been  too- 
thers? pag.  16. 

4.  You  fay,  p.  17.  He  hath  fomething  of  the  Nonconformifts  in 
him,  andfor  that  reafon  he  fpareth  him  : 

Anfw*  Do  not  Nonconformifts  differ  from  Eraflians  ?  Did  not  I  write 
againft  his  opinion  of  Church-Government  I-  And  did  he  not  bear  22 
years  ago  when  Conformity  was  not  in  our  Controverfies. 

5.  You  fay  of  [the  party  that  come  nearefl  the  dottrine  of  Calvinifts  and 
Puritans,  (chough  you  fay  you  mean  fuch  as  D.  M.  your  Reader  muft 
iuppofe  you  mean  the  Nonconformifts^  that  [they  are  the  true  Caufes 
of  all  our  prefent  evils.  — For  the  late  War  was  raifed,  —  by  the  very  befl  of 
you,  &c.~]  If  you  mean,  as  you  feem,  it's  fomewhat  extraordinary  to 
perfwade  men  to  believe  this  in  the  fame  Land  and  Age  that  the  War 
was  raifed  in ;  And  for  one  to  do  this  that  had  the  firft  General  of  the 
Horfe  in  the  Earl  of  Effex  Army,  his  Patron  a  few  doors  from  him,and 
the  Lord  Hollis  a  Colonel  nearer  him  till  lately,    and  the  Lord  Prefident 
of  his  Majefties  Privy-Council  a  Colonel  not  far  off  him,and  many  more  . 
known  Conformifts,  who  could  ail  quickly  have  fatisfied  him  how  few 
Nonconformifts  were  Members  of  Parliament  or  Commanders  in  the 
Army  when  the  War  began,  and  that  it  was  betwnen  two  parties  of 
Conformifts  that  the  Wars  began,  as  I  have  proved  againft  Mr.Hink- 
ley,  and  can  fullier  do  when  there  is  need.    Which  party  is  rrioft  obli- 
ged to  repentance  you  may  difpute  with  thofe  that  are  fit  for  it.*  But 
if  vour  intimation  be  untrue,  it  is  of  another  nature,  and  degree  than 
any  of  Dr.  Moulins-    I  confefs  one  party  did  in  many  Parliaments  be- 
fore, and  in  that,  accufe  Bifhop  Laud  and  his  new  followers,  1.  Of 
Innovations,  2.  Of  Arminianifm,   *.  Of  promoting  abfolute  arbitra- 
ry Government  againft  the  Subjects  Property  and  Liberty,  4.  And  of 
promoting  Popery.    But  if  this  party  were  not  Conformifts  of  the 
Church  of  England,  the  Bifhops,  Clergy  and  Gentry  were  not  the 
Church  in  Arch-bifhop  Abbots  days  before  Bifhop  Laud. 

As 


(i*9) 

As  to  the  Reafons  of  their  accufations,  and  the  publifhing  the  Ar- 
ticles for  Toleration  in  order  to  the  Sp.  and  Fr.  Match,  &c.  I  pais 
them  by.  Butbecaufe  you  may  fay  fome  fuch  think  of  me  as  you  do 
of  D.  M  for  what  I  fay  in  my  fearchfor  the  Schifmaticki,  I  only  add, 
i.  That  I  hope  we  may  tranfcribe  mens  own  words,  2.  And  may  judge 
that  there  is  fome  difference  between  the  Bifhops  that  judged  the  Pope 
Antichrift,  &c.  and  thofe  that  would  have  us  as  the  way  to  unity,  to 
obey  him  as  Patriarch  of  the  Weft>  and  principium  unitatis,  and  the  firft 
6  or  8  General  Councils,  and  that  fay  our  concord  muft  be  in  obey- 
ing HnHmCollegiHrnTafiorum,  ruling  the  whole  Church  p er  liter as  for ma- 
tiu,  and  that  fay  the  Roman  Church  is  a  true  Church,  but  fo  are  none 
of  the  Reformed  that  have  not  Bifhops,  and  a  continued  fucceflive  Or- 
dination by  fuch- 


A  Copy 


t  *?o  ) 


A  Copy  of  a  Letter  written  by  Mr.  Lewis  Du  Moulin 
to  the  Worthy  Dr.  Tho.  Coxe }  With  the  Drs.  An- 
fwer  occafioned  by  fome  Reports  that  concern- 
ed Dr.  Lewis  Du  Moulin. 


Worthy  Sir, 

KNowing  the  natural  inclination  you  have  to  oblige  all  men  and  the  fer- 
ticular  experience  1  have  of  your  unwearied  goodnefs  to  my  per f on 
and  family  did  incourage  me  to  write  both  before  and  now  ^  The  occafion 
of  both  was  the  Reports  fpread  abroad  of  my  Father ,  being  informed  you 
had  made  him  the  objeel  of  your  Care  during  his  ficknefs,  1  rejoyced  that 
Pr evidence  had  ordered  it  fo  that  a  P erf  on  of  your  approved  worth  and  In- 
tegrity was  concerned  about  him-  J  {hall  not  trouble  you  with  the  Relations 
Fame  has  brought  into  this  Country,  but  (liallonly  defire  to  tyowhowhedied'. 
Was  there  any  advantage  taken  of  his  weahnefs  of  body  or  mind ;  How  far 
did  his  Reported  Recantation  extend?  Reach*  d  it  to  any  material  thing  of  his 
Tenets,  or  only  in  reference  to  perfonal  Reflections  *,  This  is  what  is  hum- 
bly defired  by} 

Honoured  Siry 

Tour  moft  Humble  and  obliged  Servant, 

.    Lewis  Du  Moulin. 

From  my  Houfe  at  Malton 
in  Torkjhirc,  Otlober 
the  7^.  1680. 


The 


(  i9i   ) 
The  Drs.  Anfwcr  to  Mr.  Lew's  Du  Moulin. 


Sir, 

I  Had  not  delayed  to  return  an  Anfwer  to  your  fir fl  Letter,  had  I  known 
how  to  direct  mine  to  you,  which  indeed  1  had  forgotten  how  to  do  '-, 
This  is  therefore  to' let- yon  know  that  your  Father  (my  honoured  Friend) 
Dr.  Du  Moulin,  Dyed  as  he  had  Livedo  a  truly  pons  man,  agreeX  hater 
of  the  Romifh  Superjfition,  and  of  fo  much  of  the  Englifh  Ceremonies  as 
he  thought  approached  thofe  of  Rome  ',  He  loved  all  good  men  of  what  per- 
fwafion  [oever,  agreeing  in  the  Fundamentals  of  the  Proteftant  Religion. 
When  feme  worthy  and  Learned  men  did  on  his  Death  bed  intimate  to  him 
that  he  had  fain  too  heavy  upon  many  Pious  and  Learned  men  of  the  Church 
of  England :  He  profeffed  himfelf  never  to  have  born  any  mdice  in  hit 
heart  againft  the  P  erf  on  of  any  of  them,  but  that  his  intention  was  only  to 
blame  them  for  having  too  much  gratified  the  Enemies  of  the  true  Proteftant 
Religion,  by  their  condefcentitns  to  them,  and  their  too  great  compliances 
with  them  :  He  never  recanted  nor  retraced  ahy  thing  material  that  he  had 
Profeffed  and  Printed  of  late  years  ;  if  he  had  ufed  any  fharp  expreffions, 
or  by  any  reflections  given  any  offence  to  any  truly  pious  man,  he  heartily 
prayed  their  pardon,  and  as  heartily  forgave  all  men,  as  he  de fired  them 
to  forgive  him.  And  this  heh  ad  often  before  expreffed  to  me  both  in  pub* 
lick^  at  my  Houfe,  and  in  private  between  himfelf  and  me,  and  alfo  after 
that  fome  worthy  men  had  been  with  him,  which  gave  occafion  to  this  dtf- 
courfe.    This  for  your  fatisfattion  is  with  truth  and  fmcerity  attefted  bf 

Tour  Affectionate  Friend 

Tho.  Coxa 

London,  Ottob.  29. 


POST- 


POSTSCRIPT. 

Five  Additional  Notices  to  the  Reader.     ' 

THere  are  fome  things  of  which  I  thought  meet  to  add  this  no- 
tice to  the  Reader. 

I.  That  I  am  more  alienated  from  Conformity  in  the  point  of 
^ffent9  Confent  and  Vfe ,  in  denying  Chriftendom  to  all  Children 
who  have  no  Godfathers  and  Godmothers,  and  excluding  the  Pa- 
rents from  that  Office,  by  fome  late  Observations  which  ray  re- 
tirednefs  kept  me  unacquainted  with  :  I  am  requefted  by  fome 
poor  People  to  Baptize  their  Children  :  I  tell  them  the  ParifhMi- 
jiifters  muft  do  it.  They  anfwer  me,  That  they  cannot  have  them 
Baptized  by  the  Parifh  Minifters,  becaufe  they  are  poor;  and  can 
neither  pay  the  Curate  nor  the  Godfathers :  Task  them,  Cannot  yen  get 
Godfathers  without  money  :  They  fay,  No:  No  body  will  be  Godfather 
to  their  Children  for  nothing?  Whereupon  enquiring  into  the  cafe, 
1  am  informed,  that  among  the  poor  it  is  become  a  trade,  to  be 
hired  perfons  to  be  Godfathers  and  Godmothers ;  and  fome  that 
have  not  money  mud  leave  their  Children  unbaptized,  and  till 
lately,  Popifh  Priefts  Baptized  many.  I  am  not  willing  to  aggra- 
vate this  Hiring,  nor  the  caufes  of  it,  nor  that  the  fame  men  that 
think  Baptifm  neceflary  to  Salvation,  (  or  as  Mr.  Dodwell  fpeaks, 
to  a  Covenant  right  to  Salvation)  fhould  yet  fhut  out  all  that  have 
not  money  to  hire  fuch  Covenanters j  But  I  am  not  Conformable 
to  fuch  Church-Orders. 

II.  Whereas  there  is  a  great  ftrefs  laid  on  Mr.  Rathband's  Book 
of  the  old  Nonconforming  Doctrine  againft  the  Brorvmflsy  as  if  they 
thought'  that  meer  obedience  to  the  Law  required  them  to  forbear 
Preaching  when  they  were  filenced,  when  indeed  they  only  thought, 
i.  That  it  bound  them  to  give  up  the  Temples  and  Tithes  and 
publick  maintenance  (which  are  at  the  Magiftrates  difpofe,J  2.  And 
to  forbear  that  mmner  and  thofe  circitmftances  of  their  Miniftry  as 
no  Law  of  God  in  Nature  or  Scripture  do  oblige  them  to,  but 

will 


(  l93  ) 

will  do  more  hurt  than  good  •,  I  have  now  for  fuller  fatisfa&ion, 
here  added  the  Teftimony  of  his  Son  concerning  his  judgment  snd 
practice :  who  nineteen  years  had  his  liberty  in  Lancashire  to  Preach  . 
publickly,  in  a  Chappel,  and  after  that  in  Northumberland*  and 
no  wonder  if  the  diforders  of  Brovpnifm  that  would  have  deprived 
them  of  all  fuch  liberty  were  oppofed.  I  have  perufed  Mr.  Rath- 
band's  Book  (written  by  fome  others,)  and  I  find  nothing  in  it  that 
I  confent  not  to7  but  defire  him  that  would  underltand  it  to  read 
the  Book  it  felf. 

Mr.  Rathband's  Letter  to  me  is  as  followeth. 

-  Reverend  5#V, 

WHereas  Doftor  Stillingfleet  in  a  late  Book  of  his  hath 
alledged  a  Book  publijhed  by  my  Father,  to  prove  that 
Preaching  contrary  to  our  Eftablifhed  Laws  is  contrary  to  the 
Dottrine  of  all  the  Nonconformifts  in  former  timesy  I  aJfureyouf 
Sir,  that  my  Father  is  not  to  be  reckoned  in  that  number ;  for 
he  exercifed  his  Miniftry,  though  contrary,  to  the  Law,  for 
many  years  at  a  Chappel  in  Lancalhire  ,  and  after  he  was  fi- 
lenced  he  Preached  in  private,  as  he  had  opportunity  and  the 
times  would  bear ;  of  which  I  my  felf  was  fometime  a  witnefs. 
Afterward,  upon  the  invitation  of  a  Gentleman,  he  exercifed 
his  Miniftry  at  Belfliam  in  Northumberland,  for  about  a  year, 
and  from  thence  he  removed  to  Owingham  in  the  fame  Coun- 
ty, where  he  Preached  alfo  about  a  year,  till  being  filenced 
there,  he  retired  into  private  as  formerly.  This  I  thought  ex- 
pedient to  fignifie  to  you,  and  you  may  make  what  ufe  of  it  you 
fleafe,  for  what  is  written  here  fha/l  be  owned  by 

SIR,  Tours  in  all  Chriftian  refpefts, 

William  Rathband. 


London,  April  2. 
1681. 


Cc  (Vk 


(  *94r  ) 

(He  is  a  Grave  and  worthy  Nonconforming  eje&ed  Minifter,  li- 
ving ufually  in  High-gate.)  His  Father  read  part  of  the  Common- 
Prayer,  and  kept  in  as  aforefaid. 

And  I  thank  Do&or  Stillingfleet  for  fo  full  a  Vindication  of 
fuch  old  Nonconformifts  againlt  the  Accufations  of  their  Profe- 
cutors. 

III.  When  my  Book  was  almoft  Printed,  I  received  the  Manu- 
fcript.of  a  faithful  Learned  ejedted  Minifter,  in  which,  he  mani- 
fefteth  the  fallacy  of  Do&or  Stilling  fleets  Allegations  of  Hiftory 
for  the  Antiquity  of  Diocefan  Bifhops,  and  fully  proveth  that  for 
the  firft  three  hundred  years  the  Biihops  were  Congregational  and 
Parochial,  and  that  with  fo'full  evidence,  as  that  out  of  Strabo  and  o- 
ther  Geographers  hefheweth  that  many  of  their  Seats  were  but  about 
four  Miles  from  one  another,  as  our  Parifh  Churches  are  ^  and  he 
tonfuteth  what  is  faid  againft  it.  And  he  (heweth  the  Doctors 
grofs  abufe  of  Hiftory,  to  prove  thatBifhops  needed  not  the  Peo- 
ples confent,  and  proveth  that  the  Peoples  choice  or  confent  was 
neceflary  by  the  conftant  judgment  of  the  Churches. 

But  this  Book  is  of  fo  great  worth,  that  I  will  not  difhonour  it 
by  making  it  an  Appendix  to  mine,  but  intend  to  make  To  bold 
with  the  Author,*  as  to  publifh  it  by  it  felf. 

i.  As  a  fuller  Confutation  to  Do&or  Stillingfleet. 

2.  As  a  full  Anfwer  to  Mr.  DodwPs  Letters  on  that  fubjeft  •, 

And  $.  As  a  Confirmation  of  my  full  proof  of  the  famethings* 
in  my  Treatife  of  Epifcopacy. 

IV.  And  if  any  will  receive  that  from  a  Conformift,  which  he 
will  not  receive  from  fuch  a  one  as  I,  he  may  read, 

i.  Our  full  and  faithful  Vindication  by  a  Beneficed  Minifter,  and 
a  Regular  fon  of  the  Church,  Called  A  Companionate  Confideration  of 
the  Cafe  of  the  Nonconformifts :  I  am  not  fo  happy  as  to  know  the 
Author,  but  he  confirmeth  my  former  Judgment,  that  a  great  part 
of  the  PafTive  Conformifts  are  moderate  worthy  men,  with  whom 
we  fliould  earneftly  endeavour  as  near  and  fait  a  coalition  as  is  polfible 
to  be  had  by  lawful  means* 

2.  And  either  the  fame  hand,  or  fuch  another  Conformift,  hath 
written  Reflections  on  Dottor  Stillingfleet,  in  which  the  like  candor 
and  charity  appear eth,  though  with  fome  excefs  of  kindnefs  to  me* 

Vo  With 


"II 


V 


95  ) 


V.  With  this  Defence  agamlt  Doftor  SiitUngfleit,  I  zt  oiice  pub* 
blifh  in  another  Volume,  An  Apology  fir  the  Nonconformist  Preach- 
ing, with  an  Anfwer  to  a  multitude  of  their  Accufers,  and  Reafons 
to  prove  that  it  is  the  Bifhops  and  Conformifts  great  Duty  andln- 
terefi  to  feek  their  Reftoration.  Which  is  the  molt  material  part 
of  the  Confutation  of  Do&or  Stillingfleet,  who  would  perfuade  us 
that  our  Preaching  is  a  fin,  and  make  us  guilty  of  filencing  our 
felves. 


FINIS. 


Be  !  JatelyPinrteJ  r  ?^vil  Simmons,  at  the 
1  CoS  at  the  Weft-end  of  St.  Pauls.. 


Three 


i.  v^Hurch-Hiftory  of  the  Government  of  Bifhops  and  their 
V^-/  Councils  abbreviated  ?  Including  the  Chief  part  of 
the  Government  of  Chriftian  Princes  and  Popes,  and  a  true  account 
of  the  moft  troubling  Controverfies  and  Herefies  til!  the  Reforma- 
tien.  Written  for  the  ufe  efpecially  of  them  ^  i.  Who  are  igno- 
rant or  mifinformed  of  the  ftate  of  the  Ancient  Churches.  2.  Who 
cannot  read  many  and  great  Volumes.  $.  Who  think  that 
the  Univerfal  Church  muft  have  one  vifible  Soveraign,  Perfonal 
or  Collective,  Pope  or  General  Councils.  4.  Who  would  know 
whether  Patriarchs,  Diocefans,  and  their  Councils,  have  been,  or 
muft:  be  the  Cure  of  Herefies  andSchifms.,  5.  Who  would  know  the 
truth  about  the  great  Herefies  which  liave  divided  the  Chriftian 
World,  efpecially  the  Donatifts,  Ncvatiaw,  Ariam,  Macedonians  >  Ne- 
Jloriansy  Entychians,  Monothelites>  &c. 

2.  A  Treatiie  of  Epifcopacy  ;  Confuting  by  Scripture,  Reafon, 
and  the  Churches  Teftimony,  that fort*>f  Diocefan  Churches,  Prela- 
cy, and  Government,  which  cafteth  out  the  Primitive  Church  Spe- 
cies, Epifcopacy,  Miniftry  and  Discipline,  and  confoundeth  the  Chri- 
ftian World  by  Corruption,  Ufurpation ,  Schifm,  and  Perfection. 
Meditated  in  the  Year,  1640,  when  the  Et-catera  Oath  was  impofed. 
Written  1671.  and  call  by.  Publifhed  1680.  by  the  importunity  of 
our  Superiours,  who  demand  the  Reafons  of  our  Nonconformity. 

3.  A  Moral  Prognostication,  1.  What  fhall  befall  the  Church  on 
Earth,  till  their  Concord,  by  the  Reftitution  of  their  Primitive  pu- 
rity, fimplicity,  and  Charity.  2.  How  that  Restitution  is  like  to  be 
made,  (if  ever)  and  what  (hall  befall  them  thenceforth  unto  the  End, 
in  that  Golden  Age  of  Love.     All  three  by  Rich.  Baxter. 

4.  Memorabilia:  or,  The  moft  Remarkable  PafTages  and  Counfels, 
Colle&ed  out  ofthefeveral  Declarations  and  Speeches  that  have  beenj 


2'  ^n^*nt,  "1680.    Reduced  under  four  Heads-,    i 
"ligu 
-nis.     By  Edward  Cookey  of  the  Middlc.T*mplt>  Efqi 


his 

laft 

Of  the  Prote- 


wntten  Riigica,  2.  Of  Popery.  3.  Of  Liberty  and  Property,  &c.  4.  Of 
and  charitv-       «-~i.     *-  »     -e +*—  ,.1,,  «.      ,    r^